PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AWR vs. CWT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends
Financials

Performance

AWR vs. CWT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in American States Water Company (AWR) and California Water Service Group (CWT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AWR achieves a 19.78% return, which is significantly higher than CWT's 17.43% return. Over the past 10 years, AWR has outperformed CWT with an annualized return of 9.28%, while CWT has yielded a comparatively lower 6.29% annualized return.


AWR

1D
-0.37%
1M
1.04%
6M
18.99%
YTD
19.78%
1Y
17.73%
3Y*
2.09%
5Y*
1.52%
10Y*
9.28%
ALL TIME*
12.07%

CWT

1D
-0.77%
1M
-0.24%
6M
13.83%
YTD
17.43%
1Y
10.84%
3Y*
1.23%
5Y*
-2.29%
10Y*
6.29%
ALL TIME*
9.58%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$26.21M$26.71M$26.89M
$24.21M$23.35M$24.82M

AWR vs. CWT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
AWR
American States Water Company
19.78%-4.32%-1.18%-11.43%-8.92%32.25%-6.75%31.19%17.91%29.76%
CWT
California Water Service Group
17.43%-1.81%-10.64%-12.83%-14.13%35.05%6.68%9.85%7.06%36.39%

Correlation

The correlation between AWR and CWT is 0.88, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.88

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.86

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.87

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.85

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 26, 1990

0.51

Over the past year, AWR and CWT have become more correlated (0.88) than their long-term average of 0.51, meaning their price movements have been converging.

Fundamentals

Market Cap

AWR:

$3.36B

CWT:

$3.00B

EPS

AWR:

$3.44

CWT:

$2.23

PE Ratio

AWR:

24.92

CWT:

22.50

PEG Ratio

AWR:

2.35

CWT:

0.54

PS Ratio

AWR:

4.90

CWT:

2.84

PB Ratio

AWR:

3.16

CWT:

1.66

Total Revenue (TTM)

AWR:

$679.25M

CWT:

$1.05B

Gross Profit (TTM)

AWR:

$303.17M

CWT:

$196.22M

EBITDA (TTM)

AWR:

$233.31M

CWT:

$346.36M

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

AWR vs. CWT — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

AWR
AWR Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
AWR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AWR Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
AWR Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
AWR Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
AWR Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
Martin Ratio Rank

CWT
CWT Risk / Return Rank: 6161
Overall Rank
CWT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CWT Sortino Ratio Rank: 5656
Sortino Ratio Rank
CWT Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
CWT Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
CWT Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

AWR vs. CWT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for American States Water Company (AWR) and California Water Service Group (CWT). 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.


AWRCWTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.42

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.57

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.18

1.11

+0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.34

0.92

+1.42

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.12

1.74

+3.38

AWR vs. CWT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AWR Sharpe Ratio is 0.96, which is higher than the CWT Sharpe Ratio of 0.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AWR and CWT, 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...

Drawdowns

AWR vs. CWT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AWR drawdown since its inception was -37.39%, roughly equal to the maximum CWT drawdown of -38.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AWR and CWT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AWRCWTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-37.39%

-38.21%

+0.82%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.41%

-14.59%

+6.18%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.10%

-24.13%

+0.03%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-32.85%

-38.21%

+5.36%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-32.85%

-38.21%

+5.36%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-8.65%

-22.88%

+14.23%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.81%

-11.75%

+0.94%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.83%

7.70%

-3.87%

Volatility

AWR vs. CWT - Volatility Comparison

American States Water Company (AWR) and California Water Service Group (CWT) have volatilities of 6.58% and 6.85%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


AWRCWTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.58%

6.85%

-0.27%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.19%

19.17%

-2.98%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.43%

24.72%

-4.29%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.73%

24.33%

-1.60%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

26.21%

27.72%

-1.51%

Dividends

AWR vs. CWT - Dividend Comparison

AWR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.35%, less than CWT's 2.53% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
AWR
American States Water Company
2.35%2.68%2.30%2.06%1.65%1.35%1.61%1.34%1.58%1.72%2.01%2.08%
CWT
California Water Service Group
2.53%2.86%2.47%2.01%1.65%1.28%1.57%1.53%1.57%1.59%2.04%2.88%

Financials

AWR vs. CWT - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between American States Water Company and California Water Service Group. 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


Values in USD except per share items

AWR vs. CWT - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between American States Water Company and California Water Service Group over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

Gross Margin
Operating Margin
Net Margin
Quarterly
Annual

AWR - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Aug 2026, American States Water Company reported a gross profit of 0.00 and revenue of 169.19M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 0.0%.

CWT - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Aug 2026, California Water Service Group reported a gross profit of -63.68M and revenue of 308.60M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was -20.6%.

AWR - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Aug 2026, American States Water Company reported an operating income of 51.37M and revenue of 169.19M, resulting in an operating margin of 30.4%.

CWT - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Aug 2026, California Water Service Group reported an operating income of 70.83M and revenue of 308.60M, resulting in an operating margin of 23.0%.

AWR - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Aug 2026, American States Water Company reported a net income of 29.95M and revenue of 169.19M, resulting in a net margin of 17.7%.

CWT - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Aug 2026, California Water Service Group reported a net income of 56.47M and revenue of 308.60M, resulting in a net margin of 18.3%.


Frequently Asked Questions


AWR and CWT have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CWT has higher volatility (6.85%) compared to AWR (6.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AWR dropped -37.39% vs CWT's -38.21%.

AWR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.96 vs 0.54), 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 AWR and CWT

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