AMBA vs. ACLS
AMBA (Ambarella, Inc.) and ACLS (Axcelis Technologies, Inc.) are both stocks. Both operate in the Semiconductor Equipment & Materials industry within the Technology sector. Over the past 10 years, AMBA returned 4.73%/yr vs 30.54%/yr for ACLS. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
AMBA vs. ACLS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AMBA achieves a 4.18% return, which is significantly lower than ACLS's 98.15% return. Over the past 10 years, AMBA has underperformed ACLS with an annualized return of 4.73%, while ACLS has yielded a comparatively higher 30.54% annualized return.
AMBA
- 1D
- -5.84%
- 1M
- 4.36%
- YTD
- 4.18%
- 6M
- 5.26%
- 1Y
- 37.00%
- 3Y*
- -1.21%
- 5Y*
- -5.58%
- 10Y*
- 4.73%
ACLS
- 1D
- 0.26%
- 1M
- 12.21%
- YTD
- 98.15%
- 6M
- 80.86%
- 1Y
- 168.58%
- 3Y*
- -0.66%
- 5Y*
- 30.84%
- 10Y*
- 30.54%
AMBA vs. ACLS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AMBA Ambarella, Inc. | 4.18% | -2.61% | 18.68% | -25.47% | -59.47% | 120.96% | 51.62% | 73.13% | -40.46% | 8.54% |
ACLS Axcelis Technologies, Inc. | 98.15% | 14.98% | -46.13% | 63.42% | 6.44% | 156.04% | 20.83% | 35.39% | -37.98% | 97.25% |
Correlation
The correlation between AMBA and ACLS is 0.55, 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 | 0.55 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.56 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.65 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.56 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 11, 2012 | 0.47 |
The correlation between AMBA and ACLS shifts across timeframes, from 0.47 (all time) to 0.65 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Fundamentals
AMBA:
$3.22B
ACLS:
$4.93B
AMBA:
-$1.62
ACLS:
$3.21
AMBA:
7.82
ACLS:
5.92
AMBA:
5.31
ACLS:
4.72
AMBA:
$405.19M
ACLS:
$845.44M
AMBA:
$238.32M
ACLS:
$368.66M
AMBA:
-$69.43M
ACLS:
$129.11M
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
AMBA vs. ACLS — Risk / Return Rank
AMBA
ACLS
AMBA vs. ACLS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Ambarella, Inc. (AMBA) and Axcelis Technologies, Inc. (ACLS). 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.
| AMBA | ACLS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.57 | 2.99 | -2.42 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.17 | 3.39 | -2.22 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.17 | 1.43 | -0.26 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.76 | 6.47 | -5.72 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.60 | 15.03 | -13.43 |
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
| AMBA | ACLS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.57 | 2.99 | -2.42 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.09 | 0.57 | -0.66 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.08 | 0.57 | -0.49 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.35 | 0.03 | +0.32 |
Drawdowns
AMBA vs. ACLS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AMBA drawdown since its inception was -81.65%, smaller than the maximum ACLS drawdown of -99.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AMBA and ACLS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AMBA | ACLS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -81.65% | -99.34% | +17.69% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -49.06% | -26.20% | -22.86% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -54.85% | -78.84% | +23.99% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -81.65% | -78.84% | -2.81% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -81.65% | -78.84% | -2.81% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -65.97% | -20.60% | -45.37% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -48.36% | -72.37% | +24.01% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 23.14% | 11.26% | +11.88% |
Volatility
AMBA vs. ACLS - Volatility Comparison
Ambarella, Inc. (AMBA) has a higher volatility of 30.62% compared to Axcelis Technologies, Inc. (ACLS) at 25.94%. This indicates that AMBA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ACLS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AMBA | ACLS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 30.62% | 25.94% | +4.68% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 46.31% | 45.82% | +0.49% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 65.53% | 57.01% | +8.52% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 62.82% | 54.63% | +8.19% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 56.62% | 53.35% | +3.27% |
Dividends
AMBA vs. ACLS - Dividend Comparison
Neither AMBA nor ACLS has paid dividends to shareholders.
Financials
AMBA vs. ACLS - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Ambarella, Inc. and Axcelis Technologies, 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.
Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities
AMBA vs. ACLS - Profitability Comparison
AMBA - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Ambarella, Inc. reported a gross profit of 58.59M and revenue of 100.36M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 58.4%.
ACLS - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Axcelis Technologies, Inc. reported a gross profit of 80.58M and revenue of 198.96M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 40.5%.
AMBA - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Ambarella, Inc. reported an operating income of -19.42M and revenue of 100.36M, resulting in an operating margin of -19.4%.
ACLS - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Axcelis Technologies, Inc. reported an operating income of 7.95M and revenue of 198.96M, resulting in an operating margin of 4.0%.
AMBA - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Ambarella, Inc. reported a net income of -18.09M and revenue of 100.36M, resulting in a net margin of -18.0%.
ACLS - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Axcelis Technologies, Inc. reported a net income of 9.21M and revenue of 198.96M, resulting in a net margin of 4.6%.
Frequently Asked Questions
AMBA and ACLS have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
AMBA has higher volatility (30.62%) compared to ACLS (25.94%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AMBA dropped -81.65% vs ACLS's -99.34%.
ACLS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.99 vs 0.57), 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 AMBA and ACLS
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