CAN vs. WULF

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

CAN (Canaan Inc.) and WULF (TeraWulf Inc.) are both stocks. Both are in the Technology sector — CAN in Computer Hardware, WULF in Information Technology Services. Over the past 3 years, CAN returned -62.21%/yr vs 85.20%/yr for WULF. Their 0.46 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship.

Performance

CAN vs. WULF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Canaan Inc. (CAN) and TeraWulf Inc. (WULF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CAN achieves a -75.36% return, which is significantly lower than WULF's 53.70% return.

CAN

• 1D: -30.24%
• 1M: -40.04%
• 6M: -75.00%
• YTD: -75.36%
• 1Y: -74.21%
• 3Y*: -62.21%
• 5Y*: -52.29%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -44.73%

WULF

• 1D: -0.90%
• 1M: -16.62%
• 6M: 32.09%
• YTD: 53.70%
• 1Y: 271.01%
• 3Y*: 85.20%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -11.93%

*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)
CAN Canaan Inc.	$2.57M	$2.82M	$3.56M
WULF TeraWulf Inc.	$594.29M	$753.10M	$725.98M

CAN vs. WULF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
CAN Canaan Inc.	-75.36%	-66.34%	-11.26%	12.14%	-60.00%	-8.69%
WULF TeraWulf Inc.	53.70%	103.00%	135.83%	260.58%	-95.58%	-52.66%

Correlation

The correlation between CAN and WULF is 0.47, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.47
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.50
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 14, 2021	0.46

Fundamentals

Market Cap CAN : $79.84M WULF : $8.75B
EPS CAN : -$0.35 WULF : -$2.52
PS Ratio CAN : 0.20 WULF : 42.81
Total Revenue (TTM) CAN : $510.04M WULF : $168.06M
Gross Profit (TTM) CAN : $17.56M WULF : $107.59M
EBITDA (TTM) CAN : -$144.51M WULF : -$132.10M

Return for Risk

CAN vs. WULF — Risk / Return Rank

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

CAN

CAN Risk / Return Rank: 14
CAN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 16
CAN Sortino Ratio Rank: 13
CAN Omega Ratio Rank: 16
CAN Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
CAN Martin Ratio Rank: 16

WULF

WULF Risk / Return Rank: 94
WULF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
WULF Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
WULF Omega Ratio Rank: 90
WULF Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
WULF Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

CAN vs. WULF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Canaan Inc. (CAN) and TeraWulf Inc. (WULF). 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.

	CAN	WULF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.63	2.26	-2.89
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.96	3.08	-4.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.90	1.36	-0.46
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.82	5.09	-5.91
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.20	16.02	-17.22

CAN vs. WULF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CAN Sharpe Ratio is -0.63, which is lower than the WULF Sharpe Ratio of 2.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CAN and WULF, 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

CAN vs. WULF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CAN drawdown since its inception was -99.53%, roughly equal to the maximum WULF drawdown of -98.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CAN and WULF.

Drawdown Indicators

	CAN	WULF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-99.53%	-98.30%	-1.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-91.71%	-47.93%	-43.78%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-94.67%	-74.60%	-20.07%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-98.41%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-99.53%	-44.45%	-55.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-84.07%	-80.45%	-3.62%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	62.97%	15.21%	+47.76%

Volatility

CAN vs. WULF - Volatility Comparison

Canaan Inc. (CAN) has a higher volatility of 47.95% compared to TeraWulf Inc. (WULF) at 33.74%. This indicates that CAN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than WULF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CAN	WULF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	47.95%	33.74%	+14.21%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	73.73%	67.95%	+5.78%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	119.68%	107.86%	+11.82%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	111.90%	127.23%	-15.33%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	126.48%	127.23%	-0.75%

Dividends

CAN vs. WULF - Dividend Comparison

Neither CAN nor WULF has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
CAN Canaan Inc.	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
WULF TeraWulf Inc.	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	33.22%

Financials

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CAN and WULF in my portfolio?

CAN and WULF 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.

Which is riskier, CAN or WULF?

CAN has higher volatility (47.95%) compared to WULF (33.74%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CAN dropped -99.53% vs WULF's -98.30%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

WULF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.26 vs -0.63), 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.