BEAT vs. CRDF

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

BEAT (Heartbeam, Inc.) and CRDF (Cardiff Oncology, Inc.) are both stocks. Over the past 3 years, BEAT returned -45.19%/yr vs -22.67%/yr for CRDF. Their 0.14 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship.

Performance

BEAT vs. CRDF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Heartbeam, Inc. (BEAT) and Cardiff Oncology, Inc. (CRDF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BEAT achieves a -79.14% return, which is significantly lower than CRDF's -69.56% return.

BEAT

• 1D: -3.21%
• 1M: -30.47%
• 6M: -65.48%
• YTD: -79.14%
• 1Y: -50.92%
• 3Y*: -45.19%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -39.60%

CRDF

• 1D: 0.52%
• 1M: -32.65%
• 6M: -51.12%
• YTD: -69.56%
• 1Y: -67.60%
• 3Y*: -22.67%
• 5Y*: -30.62%
• 10Y*: -45.93%
• ALL TIME*: -29.15%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
BEAT Heartbeam, Inc.	$175.70K	$598.50K	$582.72K
CRDF Cardiff Oncology, Inc.	$927.22K	$1.64M	$2.02M

BEAT vs. CRDF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BEAT Heartbeam, Inc.	-79.14%	4.35%	-2.13%	-51.84%	58.44%	-42.96%
CRDF Cardiff Oncology, Inc.	-69.56%	-35.25%	193.24%	5.71%	-76.71%	6.75%

Correlation

The correlation between BEAT and CRDF is 0.20, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.20
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.15
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 11, 2021	0.14

Fundamentals

Market Cap BEAT : $17.24M CRDF : $56.14M
EPS BEAT : -$0.56 CRDF : -$0.66
PB Ratio BEAT : 32.00 CRDF : 1.68
Total Revenue (TTM) BEAT : $0.00 CRDF : $484.00K
Gross Profit (TTM) BEAT : $0.00 CRDF : -$11.32M
EBITDA (TTM) BEAT : -$20.29M CRDF : -$45.29M

Return for Risk

BEAT vs. CRDF — Risk / Return Rank

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

BEAT

BEAT Risk / Return Rank: 30
BEAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
BEAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 41
BEAT Omega Ratio Rank: 41
BEAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 19
BEAT Martin Ratio Rank: 22

CRDF

CRDF Risk / Return Rank: 10
CRDF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 10
CRDF Sortino Ratio Rank: 13
CRDF Omega Ratio Rank: 11
CRDF Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
CRDF Martin Ratio Rank: 4

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.

BEAT vs. CRDF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Heartbeam, Inc. (BEAT) and Cardiff Oncology, Inc. (CRDF). 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.

	BEAT	CRDF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.37	-0.76	+0.40
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.30	-0.94	+1.24
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.04	0.86	+0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.65	-0.86	+0.20
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.03	-1.63	+0.60

BEAT vs. CRDF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BEAT Sharpe Ratio is -0.37, which is higher than the CRDF Sharpe Ratio of -0.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BEAT and CRDF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

BEAT vs. CRDF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BEAT drawdown since its inception was -91.57%, smaller than the maximum CRDF drawdown of -99.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BEAT and CRDF.

Drawdown Indicators

	BEAT	CRDF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-91.57%	-99.96%	+8.39%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-85.45%	-74.77%	-10.68%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-85.45%	-86.29%	+0.84%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-89.31%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-99.82%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-91.57%	-99.96%	+8.39%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-63.51%	-86.29%	+22.78%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	54.22%	39.16%	+15.06%

Volatility

BEAT vs. CRDF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Heartbeam, Inc. (BEAT) is 26.30%, while Cardiff Oncology, Inc. (CRDF) has a volatility of 41.18%. This indicates that BEAT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CRDF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BEAT	CRDF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	26.30%	41.18%	-14.88%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	63.45%	65.40%	-1.95%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	152.81%	83.91%	+68.90%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	117.06%	101.00%	+16.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	117.06%	106.16%	+10.90%

Dividends

BEAT vs. CRDF - Dividend Comparison

Neither BEAT nor CRDF has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Financials

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BEAT and CRDF in my portfolio?

BEAT and CRDF 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.

Which is riskier, BEAT or CRDF?

CRDF has higher volatility (41.18%) compared to BEAT (26.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BEAT dropped -91.57% vs CRDF's -99.96%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BEAT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.37 vs -0.76), 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.