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

Performance

ABT vs. GWW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Abbott Laboratories (ABT) and W.W. Grainger, Inc. (GWW). 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 GWW's 29.79% return. Over the past 10 years, ABT has underperformed GWW with an annualized return of 11.01%, while GWW has yielded a comparatively higher 21.17% 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%

GWW

1D
0.35%
1M
5.96%
YTD
29.79%
6M
36.56%
1Y
20.24%
3Y*
23.74%
5Y*
24.53%
10Y*
21.17%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ABT vs. GWW - 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%
GWW
W.W. Grainger, Inc.
29.79%-3.41%28.21%50.53%8.75%28.80%22.85%22.25%21.69%4.35%

Correlation

The correlation between ABT and GWW is 0.20, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.20

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

0.22

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

0.31

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

0.31

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 18, 1984

0.29

The correlation between ABT and GWW shifts across timeframes, from 0.20 (1 year) to 0.31 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Fundamentals

Market Cap

ABT:

$158.10B

GWW:

$61.84B

EPS

ABT:

$3.59

GWW:

$37.26

PE Ratio

ABT:

25.21

GWW:

35.01

PEG Ratio

ABT:

1.57

GWW:

2.02

PS Ratio

ABT:

3.51

GWW:

3.39

PB Ratio

ABT:

2.39

GWW:

15.73

Total Revenue (TTM)

ABT:

$45.13B

GWW:

$18.38B

Gross Profit (TTM)

ABT:

$25.45B

GWW:

$7.20B

EBITDA (TTM)

ABT:

$10.80B

GWW:

$2.82B

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. GWW — 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

GWW
GWW Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
GWW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GWW Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
GWW Omega Ratio Rank: 6363
Omega Ratio Rank
GWW Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
GWW Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
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. GWW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Abbott Laboratories (ABT) and W.W. Grainger, Inc. (GWW). 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.


ABTGWWDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.09

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.93

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.77

1.18

-0.40

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.79

1.36

-2.15

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-1.79

2.60

-4.39

ABT vs. GWW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ABT Sharpe Ratio is -1.27, which is lower than the GWW Sharpe Ratio of 0.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ABT and GWW, 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


ABTGWWDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-1.27

0.82

-2.09

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.08

1.00

-1.08

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.47

0.74

-0.28

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.49

0.56

-0.07

Drawdowns

ABT vs. GWW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ABT drawdown since its inception was -45.66%, smaller than the maximum GWW drawdown of -56.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ABT and GWW.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ABTGWWDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-45.66%

-56.73%

+11.07%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-38.99%

-15.00%

-23.99%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-39.64%

-24.50%

-15.14%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-39.64%

-24.50%

-15.14%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.64%

-41.60%

+1.96%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-33.84%

0.00%

-33.84%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.83%

-11.01%

+0.18%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

17.23%

8.29%

+8.94%

Volatility

ABT vs. GWW - Volatility Comparison

Abbott Laboratories (ABT) has a higher volatility of 8.41% compared to W.W. Grainger, Inc. (GWW) at 4.56%. This indicates that ABT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GWW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ABTGWWDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.41%

4.56%

+3.85%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.45%

18.19%

+1.26%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

24.42%

24.80%

-0.38%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.04%

24.67%

-2.63%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.67%

28.54%

-4.87%

Dividends

ABT vs. GWW - Dividend Comparison

ABT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.70%, more than GWW's 0.71% 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%
GWW
W.W. Grainger, Inc.
0.71%0.88%0.76%0.88%1.22%1.23%1.45%1.68%1.90%2.14%2.08%2.27%

Financials

ABT vs. GWW - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Abbott Laboratories and W.W. Grainger, 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


4.00B6.00B8.00B10.00B12.00B20222023202420252026
11.16B
4.74B
(ABT) Total Revenue
(GWW) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

ABT vs. GWW - Profitability Comparison

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

Gross Margin
Operating Margin
Net Margin
Quarterly
Annual

35.0%40.0%45.0%50.0%55.0%20222023202420252026
56.3%
40.0%
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%.

GWW - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, W.W. Grainger, Inc. reported a gross profit of 1.90B and revenue of 4.74B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 40.0%.

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%.

GWW - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, W.W. Grainger, Inc. reported an operating income of 793.00M and revenue of 4.74B, resulting in an operating margin of 16.7%.

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%.

GWW - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, W.W. Grainger, Inc. reported a net income of 555.00M and revenue of 4.74B, resulting in a net margin of 11.7%.


Frequently Asked Questions


ABT and GWW have a correlation of 0.20, 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 GWW (4.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ABT dropped -45.66% vs GWW's -56.73%.

GWW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.82 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 GWW

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