BNGO vs. CLF
BNGO (Bionano Genomics, Inc.) and CLF (Cleveland-Cliffs Inc.) are both stocks. BNGO operates in Diagnostics & Research (Healthcare), while CLF operates in Steel (Basic Materials). Over the past 5 years, BNGO returned -80.25%/yr vs -14.35%/yr for CLF. Their 0.23 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship.
Performance
BNGO vs. CLF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BNGO achieves a -30.07% return, which is significantly lower than CLF's -13.25% return.
BNGO
- 1D
- 0.94%
- 1M
- -6.96%
- 6M
- -17.69%
- YTD
- -30.07%
- 1Y
- -63.73%
- 3Y*
- -85.69%
- 5Y*
- -80.25%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -66.66%
CLF
- 1D
- -0.95%
- 1M
- 16.84%
- 6M
- -16.28%
- YTD
- -13.25%
- 1Y
- 14.51%
- 3Y*
- -13.29%
- 5Y*
- -14.35%
- 10Y*
- 4.33%
- ALL TIME*
- 6.98%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $117.09K | $119.62K | $172.45K | |
| $404.71M | $285.99M | $240.22M |
BNGO vs. CLF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BNGO Bionano Genomics, Inc. | -30.07% | -91.16% | -84.74% | -87.05% | -51.17% | -2.92% | 148.39% | -76.34% | -47.60% |
CLF Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. | -13.25% | 41.28% | -53.97% | 26.75% | -26.00% | 49.52% | 77.38% | 12.72% | -37.07% |
Correlation
The correlation between BNGO and CLF is 0.19, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.19 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.25 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.31 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 21, 2018 | 0.23 |
The correlation between BNGO and CLF shifts across timeframes, from 0.19 (1 year) to 0.31 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Fundamentals
BNGO:
$12.28M
CLF:
$6.57B
BNGO:
-$6.48
CLF:
-$2.26
BNGO:
0.17
CLF:
0.23
BNGO:
$22.06M
CLF:
$19.20B
BNGO:
$3.32M
CLF:
-$319.00M
BNGO:
-$23.09M
CLF:
$294.00M
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
BNGO vs. CLF — Risk / Return Rank
BNGO
CLF
BNGO vs. CLF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Bionano Genomics, Inc. (BNGO) and Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. (CLF). 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.
| BNGO | CLF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.94 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.76 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.83 | 1.09 | -0.25 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.82 | 0.18 | -1.01 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.96 | 0.34 | -1.30 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BNGO vs. CLF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BNGO drawdown since its inception was -99.99%, roughly equal to the maximum CLF drawdown of -98.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BNGO and CLF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BNGO | CLF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -99.99% | -98.78% | -1.21% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -78.46% | -51.67% | -26.79% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -99.64% | -74.46% | -25.18% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -99.97% | -82.37% | -17.60% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -82.37% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -99.99% | -88.25% | -11.74% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -85.48% | -47.77% | -37.71% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 67.19% | 27.94% | +39.25% |
Volatility
BNGO vs. CLF - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Bionano Genomics, Inc. (BNGO) is 9.20%, while Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. (CLF) has a volatility of 20.47%. This indicates that BNGO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CLF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BNGO | CLF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.20% | 20.47% | -11.27% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 43.60% | 50.08% | -6.48% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 81.07% | 68.52% | +12.55% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 89.51% | 59.51% | +30.00% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 190.03% | 62.07% | +127.96% |
Dividends
BNGO vs. CLF - Dividend Comparison
Neither BNGO nor CLF has paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BNGO Bionano Genomics, Inc. | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
CLF Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.82% | 3.10% |
Financials
BNGO vs. CLF - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Bionano Genomics, Inc. and Cleveland-Cliffs Inc.. 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
Frequently Asked Questions
BNGO and CLF have a correlation of 0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CLF has higher volatility (20.47%) compared to BNGO (9.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BNGO dropped -99.99% vs CLF's -98.78%.
CLF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.14 vs -0.80), 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 BNGO and CLF
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