ACB vs. CGC
ACB (Aurora Cannabis Inc.) and CGC (Canopy Growth Corporation) are both stocks. Both operate in the Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic industry within the Healthcare sector. Over the past 10 years, ACB returned -23.86%/yr vs -26.81%/yr for CGC. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined.
Performance
ACB vs. CGC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ACB achieves a -31.99% return, which is significantly lower than CGC's -16.04% return. Over the past 10 years, ACB has outperformed CGC with an annualized return of -23.86%, while CGC has yielded a comparatively lower -26.81% annualized return.
ACB
- 1D
- -2.05%
- 1M
- -17.05%
- YTD
- -31.99%
- 6M
- -38.81%
- 1Y
- -29.66%
- 3Y*
- -19.55%
- 5Y*
- -49.82%
- 10Y*
- -23.86%
CGC
- 1D
- -1.04%
- 1M
- -7.97%
- YTD
- -16.04%
- 6M
- -27.49%
- 1Y
- -22.81%
- 3Y*
- -43.03%
- 5Y*
- -66.76%
- 10Y*
- -26.81%
ACB vs. CGC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACB Aurora Cannabis Inc. | -31.99% | -0.71% | -10.75% | -48.38% | -82.95% | -34.90% | -67.94% | -56.45% | -34.99% | 343.60% |
CGC Canopy Growth Corporation | -16.04% | -58.39% | -46.38% | -77.88% | -73.54% | -64.57% | 16.83% | -21.51% | 13.58% | 246.87% |
Correlation
The correlation between ACB and CGC is 0.77, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.77 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.72 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.76 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.72 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 11, 2014 | 0.66 |
The correlation between ACB and CGC shifts across timeframes, from 0.66 (all time) to 0.77 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Fundamentals
ACB:
$164.94M
CGC:
$368.47M
ACB:
-CA$1.33
CGC:
-CA$1.23
ACB:
0.74
CGC:
1.30
ACB:
0.46
CGC:
0.75
ACB:
CA$310.87M
CGC:
CA$312.34M
ACB:
CA$176.08M
CGC:
CA$77.66M
ACB:
CA$10.48M
CGC:
-CA$205.34M
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
ACB vs. CGC — Risk / Return Rank
ACB
CGC
ACB vs. CGC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Aurora Cannabis Inc. (ACB) and Canopy Growth Corporation (CGC). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| ACB | CGC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.23 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.75 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.96 | 1.04 | -0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.55 | -0.41 | -0.14 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.94 | -0.65 | -0.29 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ACB vs. CGC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ACB drawdown since its inception was -99.80%, roughly equal to the maximum CGC drawdown of -99.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACB and CGC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ACB | CGC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -99.80% | -99.85% | +0.05% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -53.93% | -55.38% | +1.45% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -70.80% | -95.10% | +24.30% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -96.93% | -99.67% | +2.74% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -99.80% | -99.85% | +0.05% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -99.80% | -99.83% | +0.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -70.71% | -62.21% | -8.50% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 31.63% | 35.37% | -3.74% |
Volatility
ACB vs. CGC - Volatility Comparison
Aurora Cannabis Inc. (ACB) has a higher volatility of 12.65% compared to Canopy Growth Corporation (CGC) at 9.37%. This indicates that ACB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CGC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ACB | CGC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.65% | 9.37% | +3.28% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 37.60% | 48.00% | -10.40% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 65.40% | 103.30% | -37.90% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 89.74% | 124.27% | -34.53% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 97.78% | 103.40% | -5.62% |
Dividends
ACB vs. CGC - Dividend Comparison
Neither ACB nor CGC has paid dividends to shareholders.
Financials
ACB vs. CGC - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Aurora Cannabis Inc. and Canopy Growth Corporation. 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
Frequently Asked Questions
ACB and CGC have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ACB has higher volatility (12.65%) compared to CGC (9.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACB dropped -99.80% vs CGC's -99.85%.
CGC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.22 vs -0.46), 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 ACB and CGC
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