BTU vs. EPAM

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Peabody Energy Corporation (BTU) and EPAM Systems, Inc. (EPAM).

Performance

BTU vs. EPAM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Peabody Energy Corporation (BTU) and EPAM Systems, Inc. (EPAM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

BTU vs. EPAM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
BTU Peabody Energy Corporation	11.19%	44.18%	-12.80%	-7.03%	162.36%	317.84%	-73.57%	-67.32%	-21.62%	27.00%
EPAM EPAM Systems, Inc.	-33.91%	-12.38%	-21.36%	-9.28%	-50.97%	86.54%	68.91%	82.88%	7.99%	44.51%

Fundamentals

EPS BTU : -$0.27 EPAM : $6.74
PS Ratio BTU : 1.01 EPAM : 1.39
Total Revenue (TTM) BTU : $3.96B EPAM : $5.46B
Gross Profit (TTM) BTU : $434.90M EPAM : $1.54B
EBITDA (TTM) BTU : $453.60M EPAM : $664.07M

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BTU achieves a 11.19% return, which is significantly higher than EPAM's -33.91% return.

BTU

• 1D: -7.65%
• 1M: 4.47%
• YTD: 11.19%
• 6M: 24.83%
• 1Y: 146.59%
• 3Y*: 10.28%
• 5Y*: 62.72%
• 10Y*: —

EPAM

• 1D: -0.57%
• 1M: -3.97%
• YTD: -33.91%
• 6M: -10.21%
• 1Y: -19.81%
• 3Y*: -23.21%
• 5Y*: -19.48%
• 10Y*: 5.81%

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

Return for Risk

BTU vs. EPAM — Risk / Return Rank

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

BTU

BTU Risk / Return Rank: 91
BTU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
BTU Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
BTU Omega Ratio Rank: 86
BTU Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
BTU Martin Ratio Rank: 93

EPAM

EPAM Risk / Return Rank: 23
EPAM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
EPAM Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
EPAM Omega Ratio Rank: 23
EPAM Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
EPAM Martin Ratio Rank: 19

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.

BTU vs. EPAM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Peabody Energy Corporation (BTU) and EPAM Systems, Inc. (EPAM). 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.

	BTU	EPAM	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.33	-0.43	+2.75
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.81	-0.31	+3.12
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	0.96	+0.38
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.56	-0.47	+6.03
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	12.94	-1.19	+14.13
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BTU vs. EPAM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BTU Sharpe Ratio is 2.33, which is higher than the EPAM Sharpe Ratio of -0.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BTU and EPAM, 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

	BTU	EPAM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.33	-0.43	+2.75
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.89	-0.36	+1.26
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.13	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.03	0.40	-0.37

Correlation

The correlation between BTU and EPAM is 0.11, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

BTU vs. EPAM - Dividend Comparison

BTU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.91%, while EPAM has not paid dividends to shareholders.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
BTU Peabody Energy Corporation	0.91%	1.01%	1.43%	0.93%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	26.43%	1.59%
EPAM EPAM Systems, Inc.	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Drawdowns

BTU vs. EPAM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BTU drawdown since its inception was -98.07%, which is greater than EPAM's maximum drawdown of -82.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BTU and EPAM.

Drawdown Indicators

	BTU	EPAM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-98.07%	-82.05%	-16.02%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-25.83%	-41.82%	+15.99%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-67.44%	-82.05%	+14.61%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-82.05%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-20.44%	-81.13%	+60.69%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-48.39%	-24.93%	-23.46%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	11.09%	16.73%	-5.64%

Volatility

BTU vs. EPAM - Volatility Comparison

Peabody Energy Corporation (BTU) has a higher volatility of 22.06% compared to EPAM Systems, Inc. (EPAM) at 7.64%. This indicates that BTU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EPAM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BTU	EPAM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	22.06%	7.64%	+14.42%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	42.29%	35.73%	+6.56%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	63.44%	46.59%	+16.85%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	70.82%	53.73%	+17.09%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	78.13%	45.47%	+32.66%

Financials

BTU vs. EPAM - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Peabody Energy Corporation and EPAM Systems, Inc. over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

BTU - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Peabody Energy Corporation reported a gross profit of 1.30M and revenue of 1.01B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 0.1%.

EPAM - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, EPAM Systems, Inc. reported a gross profit of 423.20M and revenue of 1.41B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 30.1%.

BTU - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Peabody Energy Corporation reported an operating income of -26.10M and revenue of 1.01B, resulting in an operating margin of -2.6%.

EPAM - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, EPAM Systems, Inc. reported an operating income of 149.25M and revenue of 1.41B, resulting in an operating margin of 10.6%.

BTU - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Peabody Energy Corporation reported a net income of -70.10M and revenue of 1.01B, resulting in a net margin of -6.9%.

EPAM - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, EPAM Systems, Inc. reported a net income of 109.35M and revenue of 1.41B, resulting in a net margin of 7.8%.