ASML vs. UL
ASML (ASML Holding N.V.) and UL (Unilever PLC) are both stocks. ASML operates in Semiconductor Equipment & Materials (Technology), while UL operates in Household & Personal Products (Consumer Defensive). Over the past 10 years, ASML returned 33.59%/yr vs 5.17%/yr for UL. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
ASML vs. UL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ASML achieves a 63.12% return, which is significantly higher than UL's -3.56% return. Over the past 10 years, ASML has outperformed UL with an annualized return of 33.59%, while UL has yielded a comparatively lower 5.17% annualized return.
ASML
- 1D
- -0.49%
- 1M
- -9.88%
- 6M
- 28.45%
- YTD
- 63.12%
- 1Y
- 138.60%
- 3Y*
- 37.24%
- 5Y*
- 20.47%
- 10Y*
- 33.59%
- ALL TIME*
- 27.03%
UL
- 1D
- -0.63%
- 1M
- 6.16%
- 6M
- -2.23%
- YTD
- -3.56%
- 1Y
- -4.56%
- 3Y*
- 5.22%
- 5Y*
- 2.26%
- 10Y*
- 5.17%
- ALL TIME*
- 9.38%
ASML vs. UL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASML ASML Holding N.V. | 63.12% | 56.51% | -7.70% | 39.91% | -30.49% | 64.13% | 66.06% | 93.56% | -9.80% | 56.23% |
UL Unilever PLC | -3.56% | 5.96% | 20.90% | -0.17% | -2.82% | -7.61% | 9.04% | 12.88% | -2.34% | 40.15% |
Correlation
The correlation between ASML and UL is -0.12, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.12 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.00 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.13 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.21 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 16, 1995 | 0.26 |
The correlation between ASML and UL shifts across timeframes, from -0.12 (1 year) to 0.26 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Fundamentals
ASML:
$670.25B
UL:
$133.56B
ASML:
€27.54
UL:
€5.38
ASML:
55.22
UL:
10.07
ASML:
3.63
UL:
1.97
ASML:
16.63
UL:
1.09
ASML:
26.82
UL:
7.67
ASML:
€35.33B
UL:
€109.27B
ASML:
€18.63B
UL:
€90.89B
ASML:
€13.77B
UL:
€24.12B
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
ASML vs. UL — Risk / Return Rank
ASML
UL
ASML vs. UL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ASML Holding N.V. (ASML) and Unilever PLC (UL). 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.
| ASML | UL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +3.31 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +3.61 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.42 | 0.98 | +0.44 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 7.81 | -0.18 | +7.99 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 24.29 | -0.35 | +24.64 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ASML vs. UL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ASML drawdown since its inception was -90.00%, which is greater than UL's maximum drawdown of -53.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASML and UL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ASML | UL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -90.00% | -53.55% | -36.45% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -17.85% | -25.09% | +7.24% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -45.38% | -25.09% | -20.29% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -56.84% | -25.09% | -31.75% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -56.84% | -30.13% | -26.71% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -12.59% | -15.44% | +2.85% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -28.06% | -10.62% | -17.44% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.75% | 13.20% | -7.45% |
Volatility
ASML vs. UL - Volatility Comparison
ASML Holding N.V. (ASML) has a higher volatility of 17.75% compared to Unilever PLC (UL) at 6.50%. This indicates that ASML's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than UL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ASML | UL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 17.75% | 6.50% | +11.25% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 36.22% | 17.27% | +18.95% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 45.08% | 22.22% | +22.86% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 43.09% | 21.04% | +22.05% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 39.00% | 21.52% | +17.48% |
Dividends
ASML vs. UL - Dividend Comparison
ASML's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.51%, less than UL's 3.68% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASML ASML Holding N.V. | 0.51% | 0.97% | 0.97% | 0.86% | 1.27% | 0.50% | 0.50% | 1.40% | 0.94% | 0.64% | 0.92% | 0.73% |
UL Unilever PLC | 3.68% | 3.51% | 3.29% | 3.83% | 3.57% | 3.77% | 3.07% | 3.18% | 3.49% | 2.80% | 3.42% | 3.02% |
Financials
ASML vs. UL - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between ASML Holding N.V. and Unilever PLC. 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
ASML vs. UL - Profitability Comparison
ASML - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, ASML Holding N.V. reported a gross profit of 5.04B and revenue of 9.33B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 54.0%.
UL - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, Unilever PLC reported a gross profit of 0.00 and revenue of 18.38B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 0.0%.
ASML - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, ASML Holding N.V. reported an operating income of 3.46B and revenue of 9.33B, resulting in an operating margin of 37.1%.
UL - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, Unilever PLC reported an operating income of 4.13B and revenue of 18.38B, resulting in an operating margin of 22.5%.
ASML - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, ASML Holding N.V. reported a net income of 2.92B and revenue of 9.33B, resulting in a net margin of 31.3%.
UL - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, Unilever PLC reported a net income of 2.56B and revenue of 18.38B, resulting in a net margin of 14.0%.
Frequently Asked Questions
ASML and UL have a correlation of -0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ASML has higher volatility (17.75%) compared to UL (6.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ASML dropped -90.00% vs UL's -53.55%.
ASML currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.10 vs -0.21), 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 ASML and UL
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