BKH vs. CWT
BKH (Black Hills Corporation) and CWT (California Water Service Group) are both stocks. Both are in the Utilities sector — BKH in Utilities - Diversified, CWT in Utilities - Regulated Water. Over the past 10 years, BKH returned 5.15%/yr vs 5.60%/yr for CWT. At a 0.36 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
BKH vs. CWT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with BKH having a 5.99% return and CWT slightly lower at 5.76%. Over the past 10 years, BKH has underperformed CWT with an annualized return of 5.15%, while CWT has yielded a comparatively higher 5.60% annualized return.
BKH
- 1D
- -0.81%
- 1M
- -3.13%
- YTD
- 5.99%
- 6M
- 4.93%
- 1Y
- 31.40%
- 3Y*
- 9.12%
- 5Y*
- 5.05%
- 10Y*
- 5.15%
CWT
- 1D
- -1.51%
- 1M
- 4.63%
- YTD
- 5.76%
- 6M
- 5.10%
- 1Y
- 1.75%
- 3Y*
- -4.79%
- 5Y*
- -2.52%
- 10Y*
- 5.60%
BKH vs. CWT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BKH Black Hills Corporation | 5.99% | 23.93% | 13.57% | -19.95% | 3.08% | 18.86% | -19.05% | 28.60% | 7.98% | 0.81% |
CWT California Water Service Group | 5.76% | -1.81% | -10.64% | -12.83% | -14.13% | 35.05% | 6.68% | 9.85% | 7.06% | 36.39% |
Correlation
The correlation between BKH and CWT is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.55 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.58 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.56 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 27, 1990 | 0.36 |
The correlation between BKH and CWT shifts across timeframes, from 0.36 (all time) to 0.58 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Fundamentals
BKH:
$5.46B
CWT:
$2.70B
BKH:
$2.10
CWT:
$1.99
BKH:
34.46
CWT:
22.65
BKH:
20.56
CWT:
0.55
BKH:
2.34
CWT:
2.66
BKH:
$2.29B
CWT:
$1.01B
BKH:
$596.90M
CWT:
$366.63M
BKH:
$554.70M
CWT:
$329.51M
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
BKH vs. CWT — Risk / Return Rank
BKH
CWT
BKH vs. CWT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Black Hills Corporation (BKH) 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.
| BKH | CWT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.49 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.97 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 1.03 | +0.24 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.02 | 0.12 | +2.90 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.08 | 0.23 | +8.85 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| BKH | CWT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.56 | 0.07 | +1.49 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.23 | -0.10 | +0.33 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.00 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.44 | 0.31 | +0.13 |
Drawdowns
BKH vs. CWT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BKH drawdown since its inception was -65.72%, which is greater than CWT's maximum drawdown of -38.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BKH and CWT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BKH | CWT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -65.72% | -38.21% | -27.51% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.45% | -14.59% | +4.14% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.55% | -24.13% | +0.58% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -36.98% | -38.21% | +1.23% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -40.45% | -38.21% | -2.24% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.14% | -30.55% | +25.41% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.20% | -11.70% | -4.50% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.47% | 7.70% | -4.23% |
Volatility
BKH vs. CWT - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Black Hills Corporation (BKH) is 6.20%, while California Water Service Group (CWT) has a volatility of 7.12%. This indicates that BKH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CWT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BKH | CWT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.20% | 7.12% | -0.92% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.66% | 19.03% | -3.37% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.27% | 24.16% | -3.89% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.11% | 24.29% | -2.18% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.39% | 27.73% | -2.34% |
Dividends
BKH vs. CWT - Dividend Comparison
BKH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.82%, more than CWT's 2.81% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BKH Black Hills Corporation | 3.82% | 3.90% | 4.44% | 4.63% | 3.43% | 3.25% | 3.53% | 2.61% | 3.07% | 3.01% | 2.74% | 3.49% |
CWT California Water Service Group | 2.81% | 2.86% | 2.47% | 2.01% | 1.65% | 1.28% | 1.57% | 1.53% | 1.57% | 1.59% | 2.04% | 2.88% |
Financials
BKH vs. CWT - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Black Hills Corporation 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.
Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities
BKH vs. CWT - Profitability Comparison
BKH - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Black Hills Corporation reported a gross profit of 0.00 and revenue of 780.70M. 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 Jun 2026, California Water Service Group reported a gross profit of 0.00 and revenue of 214.57M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 0.0%.
BKH - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Black Hills Corporation reported an operating income of 201.90M and revenue of 780.70M, resulting in an operating margin of 25.9%.
CWT - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, California Water Service Group reported an operating income of 18.16M and revenue of 214.57M, resulting in an operating margin of 8.5%.
BKH - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Black Hills Corporation reported a net income of -2.10M and revenue of 780.70M, resulting in a net margin of -0.3%.
CWT - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, California Water Service Group reported a net income of 4.04M and revenue of 214.57M, resulting in a net margin of 1.9%.
Frequently Asked Questions
BKH and CWT have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CWT has higher volatility (7.12%) compared to BKH (6.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BKH dropped -65.72% vs CWT's -38.21%.
BKH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.56 vs 0.07), 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 BKH 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