BITF vs. CLSK

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Bitfarms Ltd. (BITF) and CleanSpark, Inc. (CLSK).

Performance

BITF vs. CLSK - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Bitfarms Ltd. (BITF) and CleanSpark, Inc. (CLSK). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

BITF vs. CLSK - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
BITF Bitfarms Ltd.	-15.74%	57.72%	-48.80%	561.36%	-91.29%	165.79%	397.66%	-27.96%	-64.19%
CLSK CleanSpark, Inc.	-14.82%	9.88%	-16.50%	440.69%	-78.57%	-67.23%	442.99%	-73.90%	-29.31%

Fundamentals

EPS BITF : -$0.51 CLSK : -$1.28
PS Ratio BITF : 4.79 CLSK : 2.23
Total Revenue (TTM) BITF : $229.28M CLSK : $785.19M
Gross Profit (TTM) BITF : -$18.90M CLSK : $256.57M
EBITDA (TTM) BITF : -$149.60M CLSK : $131.94M

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BITF achieves a -15.74% return, which is significantly lower than CLSK's -14.82% return.

BITF

• 1D: 1.54%
• 1M: -7.91%
• YTD: -15.74%
• 6M: -29.29%
• 1Y: 144.99%
• 3Y*: 26.85%
• 5Y*: -16.81%
• 10Y*: —

CLSK

• 1D: 1.29%
• 1M: -18.29%
• YTD: -14.82%
• 6M: -40.92%
• 1Y: 14.02%
• 3Y*: 45.82%
• 5Y*: -17.81%
• 10Y*: -11.72%

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

Return for Risk

BITF vs. CLSK — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

BITF

BITF Risk / Return Rank: 78
BITF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
BITF Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
BITF Omega Ratio Rank: 78
BITF Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
BITF Martin Ratio Rank: 71

CLSK

CLSK Risk / Return Rank: 50
CLSK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
CLSK Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
CLSK Omega Ratio Rank: 49
CLSK Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
CLSK Martin Ratio Rank: 50

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

BITF vs. CLSK - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Bitfarms Ltd. (BITF) and CleanSpark, Inc. (CLSK). 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.

	BITF	CLSK	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.36	0.16	+1.20
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.35	0.92	+1.44
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.10	+0.17
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.05	0.44	+1.62
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	3.73	0.83	+2.90
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BITF vs. CLSK - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BITF Sharpe Ratio is 1.36, which is higher than the CLSK Sharpe Ratio of 0.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BITF and CLSK, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BITF	CLSK	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.36	0.16	+1.20
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.16	-0.18	+0.02
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	-0.06	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.00	-0.06	+0.06

Correlation

The correlation between BITF and CLSK is 0.53, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

BITF vs. CLSK - Dividend Comparison

Neither BITF nor CLSK has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

BITF vs. CLSK - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BITF drawdown since its inception was -100.00%, roughly equal to the maximum CLSK drawdown of -98.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BITF and CLSK.

Drawdown Indicators

	BITF	CLSK	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-100.00%	-98.56%	-1.44%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-73.65%	-64.74%	-8.91%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-95.72%	-92.25%	-3.47%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-98.56%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-77.68%	-88.19%	+10.51%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-67.90%	-69.28%	+1.38%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	40.54%	34.21%	+6.33%

Volatility

BITF vs. CLSK - Volatility Comparison

Bitfarms Ltd. (BITF) has a higher volatility of 24.76% compared to CleanSpark, Inc. (CLSK) at 21.41%. This indicates that BITF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CLSK based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BITF	CLSK	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	24.76%	21.41%	+3.35%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	79.34%	70.96%	+8.38%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	107.51%	91.38%	+16.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	106.11%	101.40%	+4.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	747,878.46%	184.27%	+747,694.19%

Financials