BABA vs. ^GSPC
BABA (Alibaba Group Holding Limited) is a stock, while ^GSPC (S&P 500 Index) is an index. Over the past 10 years, BABA returned 4.42%/yr vs 13.61%/yr for ^GSPC. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
BABA vs. ^GSPC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BABA achieves a -22.32% return, which is significantly lower than ^GSPC's 8.56% return. Over the past 10 years, BABA has underperformed ^GSPC with an annualized return of 4.42%, while ^GSPC has yielded a comparatively higher 13.61% annualized return.
BABA
- 1D
- 0.12%
- 1M
- -21.91%
- YTD
- -22.32%
- 6M
- -26.87%
- 1Y
- -2.37%
- 3Y*
- 11.06%
- 5Y*
- -10.74%
- 10Y*
- 4.42%
^GSPC
- 1D
- 0.50%
- 1M
- -0.17%
- YTD
- 8.56%
- 6M
- 8.85%
- 1Y
- 22.93%
- 3Y*
- 19.37%
- 5Y*
- 11.84%
- 10Y*
- 13.61%
BABA vs. ^GSPC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BABA Alibaba Group Holding Limited | -22.32% | 75.80% | 11.77% | -10.83% | -25.84% | -48.96% | 9.73% | 54.74% | -20.51% | 96.37% |
^GSPC S&P 500 Index | 8.56% | 16.39% | 23.31% | 24.23% | -19.44% | 26.89% | 16.26% | 28.88% | -6.24% | 19.42% |
Correlation
The correlation between BABA and ^GSPC is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.37 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.34 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.36 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.42 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 19, 2014 | 0.43 |
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
BABA vs. ^GSPC — Risk / Return Rank
BABA
^GSPC
BABA vs. ^GSPC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA) and S&P 500 Index (^GSPC). 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.
| BABA | ^GSPC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.92 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.27 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.03 | 1.34 | -0.31 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.06 | 2.53 | -2.59 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.12 | 11.37 | -11.49 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BABA vs. ^GSPC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BABA drawdown since its inception was -80.09%, which is greater than ^GSPC's maximum drawdown of -56.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BABA and ^GSPC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BABA | ^GSPC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -80.09% | -56.78% | -23.31% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -39.94% | -9.10% | -30.84% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -39.94% | -18.90% | -21.04% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -72.48% | -25.43% | -47.05% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -80.09% | -33.92% | -46.17% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -62.20% | -2.34% | -59.86% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -37.56% | -10.72% | -26.84% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 19.58% | 2.02% | +17.56% |
Volatility
BABA vs. ^GSPC - Volatility Comparison
Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA) has a higher volatility of 10.07% compared to S&P 500 Index (^GSPC) at 4.43%. This indicates that BABA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ^GSPC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BABA | ^GSPC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.07% | 4.43% | +5.64% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 29.24% | 9.70% | +19.54% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 43.83% | 12.38% | +31.45% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 51.40% | 16.97% | +34.43% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 43.40% | 18.09% | +25.31% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BABA and ^GSPC have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BABA has higher volatility (10.07%) compared to ^GSPC (4.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BABA dropped -80.09% vs ^GSPC's -56.78%.
^GSPC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.86 vs -0.05), 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 BABA and ^GSPC
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