ANAB vs. CLS
ANAB (AnaptysBio, Inc.) and CLS (Celestica Inc.) are both stocks. ANAB operates in Biotechnology (Healthcare), while CLS operates in Electronic Components (Technology). Over the past 5 years, ANAB returned 28.21%/yr vs 116.26%/yr for CLS. At a 0.18 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
ANAB vs. CLS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ANAB achieves a 73.48% return, which is significantly higher than CLS's 32.99% return.
ANAB
- 1D
- 3.37%
- 1M
- -10.55%
- YTD
- 73.48%
- 6M
- 87.15%
- 1Y
- 259.27%
- 3Y*
- 64.14%
- 5Y*
- 28.21%
- 10Y*
- —
CLS
- 1D
- 1.88%
- 1M
- 5.52%
- YTD
- 32.99%
- 6M
- 28.26%
- 1Y
- 200.71%
- 3Y*
- 207.28%
- 5Y*
- 116.26%
- 10Y*
- 43.71%
ANAB vs. CLS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ANAB AnaptysBio, Inc. | 73.48% | 266.16% | -38.19% | -30.88% | -10.82% | 61.63% | 32.31% | -74.53% | -36.67% | 529.50% |
CLS Celestica Inc. | 32.99% | 220.27% | 215.23% | 159.80% | 1.26% | 37.92% | -2.42% | -5.70% | -16.32% | -16.76% |
Correlation
The correlation between ANAB and CLS 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 | 0.15 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.17 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 26, 2017 | 0.18 |
Fundamentals
ANAB:
$1.61B
CLS:
$45.48B
ANAB:
-$0.91
CLS:
$8.28
ANAB:
7.11
CLS:
3.30
ANAB:
126.20
CLS:
21.68
ANAB:
$232.39M
CLS:
$13.81B
ANAB:
$245.59M
CLS:
$1.60B
ANAB:
$52.72M
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
ANAB vs. CLS — Risk / Return Rank
ANAB
CLS
ANAB vs. CLS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AnaptysBio, Inc. (ANAB) 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.
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.
| ANAB | CLS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.02 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.16 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.53 | 1.37 | +0.16 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 9.28 | 6.91 | +2.37 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 22.38 | 16.83 | +5.55 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ANAB vs. CLS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ANAB drawdown since its inception was -92.08%, smaller than the maximum CLS drawdown of -96.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ANAB and CLS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ANAB | CLS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -92.08% | -96.93% | +4.85% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -28.15% | -29.24% | +1.09% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -69.32% | -53.96% | -15.36% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -69.32% | -53.96% | -15.36% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -80.60% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -34.57% | -16.78% | -17.79% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -64.64% | -73.31% | +8.67% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.64% | 11.98% | -0.34% |
Volatility
ANAB vs. CLS - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for AnaptysBio, Inc. (ANAB) is 12.40%, while Celestica Inc. (CLS) has a volatility of 27.54%. This indicates that ANAB 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
| ANAB | CLS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.40% | 27.54% | -15.14% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 46.31% | 55.42% | -9.11% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 68.78% | 72.65% | -3.87% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 65.31% | 57.70% | +7.61% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 75.44% | 49.97% | +25.47% |
Dividends
ANAB vs. CLS - Dividend Comparison
Neither ANAB nor CLS has paid dividends to shareholders.
Financials
ANAB vs. CLS - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between AnaptysBio, 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.
Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities
Frequently Asked Questions
ANAB and CLS 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.
CLS has higher volatility (27.54%) compared to ANAB (12.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ANAB dropped -92.08% vs CLS's -96.93%.
ANAB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.80 vs 2.78), 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 ANAB 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