ABT vs. CL
ABT (Abbott Laboratories) and CL (Colgate-Palmolive Company) are both stocks. ABT operates in Medical Devices (Healthcare), while CL operates in Household & Personal Products (Consumer Defensive). Over the past 10 years, ABT returned 11.01%/yr vs 4.21%/yr for CL. At a 0.34 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
ABT vs. CL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ABT achieves a -26.95% return, which is significantly lower than CL's 10.27% return. Over the past 10 years, ABT has outperformed CL with an annualized return of 11.01%, while CL has yielded a comparatively lower 4.21% annualized return.
ABT
- 1D
- -0.63%
- 1M
- 7.33%
- YTD
- -26.95%
- 6M
- -25.03%
- 1Y
- -30.87%
- 3Y*
- -1.86%
- 5Y*
- -1.83%
- 10Y*
- 11.01%
CL
- 1D
- -2.83%
- 1M
- -1.69%
- YTD
- 10.27%
- 6M
- 14.49%
- 1Y
- -2.21%
- 3Y*
- 6.80%
- 5Y*
- 3.26%
- 10Y*
- 4.21%
ABT vs. CL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ABT Abbott Laboratories | -26.95% | 12.87% | 4.81% | 2.26% | -20.68% | 30.53% | 28.04% | 22.08% | 29.06% | 52.03% |
CL Colgate-Palmolive Company | 10.27% | -10.98% | 16.57% | 3.78% | -5.44% | 2.08% | 27.17% | 18.60% | -19.19% | 17.88% |
Correlation
The correlation between ABT and CL is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.29 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.36 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.42 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.37 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 7, 1983 | 0.34 |
The correlation between ABT and CL shifts across timeframes, from 0.29 (1 year) to 0.42 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Fundamentals
ABT:
$158.10B
CL:
$69.29B
ABT:
$3.59
CL:
$2.58
ABT:
25.21
CL:
33.37
ABT:
1.57
CL:
8.62
ABT:
3.51
CL:
3.35
ABT:
2.39
CL:
477.90
ABT:
$45.13B
CL:
$20.80B
ABT:
$25.45B
CL:
$12.49B
ABT:
$10.80B
CL:
$3.92B
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
ABT vs. CL — Risk / Return Rank
ABT
CL
ABT vs. CL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Abbott Laboratories (ABT) and Colgate-Palmolive Company (CL). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
| ABT | CL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.17 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.71 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.77 | 1.00 | -0.23 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.79 | -0.12 | -0.68 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.79 | -0.20 | -1.60 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ABT | CL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -1.27 | -0.10 | -1.17 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.08 | 0.17 | -0.26 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.47 | 0.21 | +0.25 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.49 | 0.42 | +0.07 |
Drawdowns
ABT vs. CL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ABT drawdown since its inception was -45.66%, smaller than the maximum CL drawdown of -58.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ABT and CL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ABT | CL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -45.66% | -58.91% | +13.25% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -38.99% | -18.64% | -20.35% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -39.64% | -29.05% | -10.59% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -39.64% | -29.05% | -10.59% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -39.64% | -29.05% | -10.59% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -33.84% | -17.54% | -16.30% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.83% | -11.24% | +0.41% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 17.23% | 11.29% | +5.94% |
Volatility
ABT vs. CL - Volatility Comparison
Abbott Laboratories (ABT) has a higher volatility of 8.41% compared to Colgate-Palmolive Company (CL) at 7.77%. This indicates that ABT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ABT | CL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.41% | 7.77% | +0.64% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 19.45% | 17.27% | +2.18% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 24.42% | 21.67% | +2.75% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.04% | 18.77% | +3.27% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.67% | 19.74% | +3.93% |
Dividends
ABT vs. CL - Dividend Comparison
ABT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.70%, more than CL's 2.43% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ABT Abbott Laboratories | 2.70% | 1.88% | 1.95% | 1.85% | 1.71% | 1.28% | 1.32% | 1.47% | 1.55% | 1.86% | 2.71% | 2.14% |
CL Colgate-Palmolive Company | 2.43% | 2.61% | 2.18% | 2.40% | 2.36% | 2.10% | 2.05% | 2.48% | 2.79% | 2.11% | 2.37% | 2.25% |
Financials
ABT vs. CL - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Abbott Laboratories and Colgate-Palmolive Company. You can select fields from income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements to easily visualize and compare the financial health of both companies.
Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities
ABT vs. CL - Profitability Comparison
ABT - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Abbott Laboratories reported a gross profit of 6.28B and revenue of 11.16B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 56.3%.
CL - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Colgate-Palmolive Company reported a gross profit of 3.23B and revenue of 5.32B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 60.6%.
ABT - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Abbott Laboratories reported an operating income of 1.84B and revenue of 11.16B, resulting in an operating margin of 16.5%.
CL - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Colgate-Palmolive Company reported an operating income of 1.16B and revenue of 5.32B, resulting in an operating margin of 21.7%.
ABT - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Abbott Laboratories reported a net income of 1.08B and revenue of 11.16B, resulting in a net margin of 9.7%.
CL - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Colgate-Palmolive Company reported a net income of 646.00M and revenue of 5.32B, resulting in a net margin of 12.1%.
Frequently Asked Questions
ABT and CL have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ABT has higher volatility (8.41%) compared to CL (7.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ABT dropped -45.66% vs CL's -58.91%.
CL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.10 vs -1.27), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for ABT and CL
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer