PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ABT vs. FANG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends
Financials

Performance

ABT vs. FANG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Abbott Laboratories (ABT) and Diamondback Energy, Inc. (FANG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ABT achieves a -26.95% return, which is significantly lower than FANG's 33.36% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with ABT having a 11.01% annualized return and FANG not far ahead at 11.24%.


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%

FANG

1D
2.89%
1M
5.61%
YTD
33.36%
6M
27.27%
1Y
44.64%
3Y*
18.70%
5Y*
22.65%
10Y*
11.24%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ABT vs. FANG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ABT
Abbott Laboratories
-26.95%12.87%4.81%2.26%-20.68%30.53%28.04%22.08%29.06%52.03%
FANG
Diamondback Energy, Inc.
33.36%-5.64%10.35%19.66%35.34%127.51%-46.00%0.92%-26.35%24.93%

Correlation

The correlation between ABT and FANG is -0.07, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.07

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.00

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.03

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.09

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 15, 2012

0.14

The correlation between ABT and FANG shifts across timeframes, from -0.07 (1 year) to 0.14 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Fundamentals

Market Cap

ABT:

$158.10B

FANG:

$56.05B

EPS

ABT:

$3.59

FANG:

$1.40

PE Ratio

ABT:

25.21

FANG:

141.45

PS Ratio

ABT:

3.51

FANG:

3.75

PB Ratio

ABT:

2.39

FANG:

1.54

Total Revenue (TTM)

ABT:

$45.13B

FANG:

$15.19B

Gross Profit (TTM)

ABT:

$25.45B

FANG:

$7.30B

EBITDA (TTM)

ABT:

$10.80B

FANG:

$5.54B

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. FANG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

ABT
ABT Risk / Return Rank: 55
Overall Rank
ABT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ABT Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
Sortino Ratio Rank
ABT Omega Ratio Rank: 44
Omega Ratio Rank
ABT Calmar Ratio Rank: 1111
Calmar Ratio Rank
ABT Martin Ratio Rank: 22
Martin Ratio Rank

FANG
FANG Risk / Return Rank: 8080
Overall Rank
FANG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FANG Sortino Ratio Rank: 7676
Sortino Ratio Rank
FANG Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
FANG Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
FANG Martin Ratio Rank: 8282
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

ABT vs. FANG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Abbott Laboratories (ABT) and Diamondback Energy, Inc. (FANG). 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.


ABTFANGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.70

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.67

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.77

1.24

-0.46

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.79

3.58

-4.37

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-1.79

7.07

-8.87

ABT vs. FANG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ABT Sharpe Ratio is -1.27, which is lower than the FANG Sharpe Ratio of 1.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ABT and FANG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ABTFANGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-1.27

1.43

-2.70

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.08

0.60

-0.68

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.47

0.23

+0.24

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.49

0.47

+0.03

Drawdowns

ABT vs. FANG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ABT drawdown since its inception was -45.66%, smaller than the maximum FANG drawdown of -88.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ABT and FANG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ABTFANGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-45.66%

-88.72%

+43.06%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-38.99%

-12.53%

-26.46%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-39.64%

-42.10%

+2.46%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-39.64%

-42.10%

+2.46%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.64%

-88.72%

+49.08%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-33.84%

-6.74%

-27.10%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.83%

-19.39%

+8.56%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

17.23%

6.33%

+10.90%

Volatility

ABT vs. FANG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is 8.41%, while Diamondback Energy, Inc. (FANG) has a volatility of 11.35%. This indicates that ABT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FANG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ABTFANGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.41%

11.35%

-2.94%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.45%

23.88%

-4.43%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

24.42%

31.51%

-7.09%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.04%

37.98%

-15.94%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.67%

49.06%

-25.39%

Dividends

ABT vs. FANG - Dividend Comparison

ABT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.70%, more than FANG's 2.09% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
FANG
Diamondback Energy, Inc.
2.09%2.66%5.06%5.15%6.55%1.62%3.10%0.74%0.40%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Financials

ABT vs. FANG - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Abbott Laboratories and Diamondback Energy, Inc.. You can select fields from income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements to easily visualize and compare the financial health of both companies.


Quarterly
Annual

Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities


2.00B4.00B6.00B8.00B10.00B12.00B20222023202420252026
11.16B
4.24B
(ABT) Total Revenue
(FANG) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

ABT vs. FANG - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Abbott Laboratories and Diamondback Energy, Inc. over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

Gross Margin
Operating Margin
Net Margin
Quarterly
Annual

20.0%40.0%60.0%80.0%100.0%20222023202420252026
56.3%
90.9%
Portfolio components
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%.

FANG - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Diamondback Energy, Inc. reported a gross profit of 3.85B and revenue of 4.24B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 90.9%.

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%.

FANG - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Diamondback Energy, Inc. reported an operating income of 30.00M and revenue of 4.24B, resulting in an operating margin of 0.7%.

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%.

FANG - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Diamondback Energy, Inc. reported a net income of 144.00M and revenue of 4.24B, resulting in a net margin of 3.4%.


Frequently Asked Questions


ABT and FANG have a correlation of -0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FANG has higher volatility (11.35%) compared to ABT (8.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ABT dropped -45.66% vs FANG's -88.72%.

FANG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.43 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ABT and FANG

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