PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ADMA vs. CLS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends
Financials

Performance

ADMA vs. CLS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ADMA Biologics, Inc. (ADMA) and Celestica Inc. (CLS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ADMA achieves a -55.81% return, which is significantly lower than CLS's 30.75% return. Over the past 10 years, ADMA has underperformed CLS with an annualized return of 1.08%, while CLS has yielded a comparatively higher 43.16% annualized return.


ADMA

1D
1.13%
1M
-1.35%
YTD
-55.81%
6M
-58.43%
1Y
-60.89%
3Y*
28.26%
5Y*
34.37%
10Y*
1.08%

CLS

1D
3.98%
1M
2.92%
YTD
30.75%
6M
13.42%
1Y
220.14%
3Y*
209.55%
5Y*
114.81%
10Y*
43.16%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ADMA vs. CLS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ADMA
ADMA Biologics, Inc.
-55.81%6.36%279.42%16.49%175.18%-27.69%-51.25%67.36%-25.55%-37.30%
CLS
Celestica Inc.
30.75%220.27%215.23%159.80%1.26%37.92%-2.42%-5.70%-16.32%-11.56%

Correlation

The correlation between ADMA and CLS is 0.15, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.15

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

0.26

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

0.27

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

0.22

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 17, 2013

0.20

The correlation between ADMA and CLS shifts across timeframes, from 0.15 (1 year) to 0.27 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Fundamentals

Market Cap

ADMA:

$1.93B

CLS:

$44.72B

EPS

ADMA:

$0.68

CLS:

$8.28

PE Ratio

ADMA:

11.91

CLS:

46.65

PS Ratio

ADMA:

3.86

CLS:

3.24

PB Ratio

ADMA:

4.95

CLS:

21.31

Total Revenue (TTM)

ADMA:

$509.86M

CLS:

$13.81B

Gross Profit (TTM)

ADMA:

$312.42M

CLS:

$1.60B

EBITDA (TTM)

ADMA:

$218.74M

CLS:

$1.32B

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

ADMA vs. CLS — Risk / Return Rank

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

ADMA
ADMA Risk / Return Rank: 33
Overall Rank
ADMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ADMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
Sortino Ratio Rank
ADMA Omega Ratio Rank: 44
Omega Ratio Rank
ADMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
Calmar Ratio Rank
ADMA Martin Ratio Rank: 22
Martin Ratio Rank

CLS
CLS Risk / Return Rank: 9393
Overall Rank
CLS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CLS Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
CLS Omega Ratio Rank: 8888
Omega Ratio Rank
CLS Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
CLS Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
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.

ADMA vs. CLS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ADMA Biologics, Inc. (ADMA) and Celestica Inc. (CLS). 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.


ADMACLSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-4.18

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-4.70

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.77

1.39

-0.62

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.94

7.58

-8.52

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-1.81

18.88

-20.69

ADMA vs. CLS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ADMA Sharpe Ratio is -1.12, which is lower than the CLS Sharpe Ratio of 3.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ADMA and CLS, 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


ADMACLSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-1.12

3.06

-4.18

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.58

2.01

-1.42

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.02

0.87

-0.85

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.01

0.27

-0.28

Drawdowns

ADMA vs. CLS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ADMA drawdown since its inception was -91.28%, smaller than the maximum CLS drawdown of -96.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ADMA and CLS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ADMACLSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-91.28%

-96.93%

+5.65%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-65.25%

-29.24%

-36.01%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-68.99%

-53.96%

-15.03%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-68.99%

-53.96%

-15.03%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-86.11%

-80.60%

-5.51%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-67.12%

-18.18%

-48.94%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-53.05%

-73.36%

+20.31%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

33.62%

11.72%

+21.90%

Volatility

ADMA vs. CLS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ADMA Biologics, Inc. (ADMA) is 11.89%, while Celestica Inc. (CLS) has a volatility of 26.60%. This indicates that ADMA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CLS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ADMACLSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

11.89%

26.60%

-14.71%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

45.36%

55.08%

-9.72%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

54.73%

72.52%

-17.79%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

59.46%

57.62%

+1.84%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

69.05%

49.93%

+19.12%

Dividends

ADMA vs. CLS - Dividend Comparison

Neither ADMA nor CLS has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Financials

ADMA vs. CLS - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between ADMA Biologics, Inc. and Celestica 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


0.001.00B2.00B3.00B4.00B20222023202420252026
114.49M
4.05B
(ADMA) Total Revenue
(CLS) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

ADMA vs. CLS - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between ADMA Biologics, Inc. and Celestica 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%0.0%20.0%40.0%60.0%80.0%20222023202420252026
70.5%
10.8%
Portfolio components
ADMA - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, ADMA Biologics, Inc. reported a gross profit of 80.75M and revenue of 114.49M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 70.5%.

CLS - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Celestica Inc. reported a gross profit of 437.20M and revenue of 4.05B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 10.8%.

ADMA - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, ADMA Biologics, Inc. reported an operating income of 58.27M and revenue of 114.49M, resulting in an operating margin of 50.9%.

CLS - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Celestica Inc. reported an operating income of 272.10M and revenue of 4.05B, resulting in an operating margin of 6.7%.

ADMA - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, ADMA Biologics, Inc. reported a net income of 45.33M and revenue of 114.49M, resulting in a net margin of 39.6%.

CLS - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Celestica Inc. reported a net income of 212.30M and revenue of 4.05B, resulting in a net margin of 5.3%.


Frequently Asked Questions


ADMA and CLS have a correlation of 0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CLS has higher volatility (26.60%) compared to ADMA (11.89%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ADMA dropped -91.28% vs CLS's -96.93%.

CLS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.06 vs -1.12), 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 ADMA and CLS

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