PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CDUAF vs. LEG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends
Financials

Performance

CDUAF vs. LEG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Canadian Utilities Limited (CDUAF) and Leggett & Platt, Incorporated (LEG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CDUAF achieves a 21.00% return, which is significantly higher than LEG's -3.16% return. Over the past 10 years, CDUAF has outperformed LEG with an annualized return of 7.46%, while LEG has yielded a comparatively lower -11.06% annualized return.


CDUAF

1D
-0.18%
1M
5.13%
YTD
21.00%
6M
24.57%
1Y
38.10%
3Y*
17.71%
5Y*
10.10%
10Y*
7.46%

LEG

1D
-0.75%
1M
15.59%
YTD
-3.16%
6M
-7.69%
1Y
16.39%
3Y*
-27.77%
5Y*
-24.81%
10Y*
-11.06%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CDUAF vs. LEG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CDUAF
Canadian Utilities Limited
21.00%35.10%6.34%-6.25%-1.87%25.16%-14.69%37.49%-19.67%15.55%
LEG
Leggett & Platt, Incorporated
-3.16%17.02%-61.93%-13.45%-17.78%-3.76%-9.05%47.13%-22.25%0.58%

Correlation

The correlation between CDUAF and LEG is -0.06, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.06

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.05

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.11

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.15

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 16, 2007

0.12

The correlation between CDUAF and LEG shifts across timeframes, from -0.06 (1 year) to 0.15 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Fundamentals

Market Cap

CDUAF:

$10.05B

LEG:

$1.49B

EPS

CDUAF:

CA$0.29

LEG:

$1.60

PE Ratio

CDUAF:

177.34

LEG:

6.62

PS Ratio

CDUAF:

4.05

LEG:

0.49

PB Ratio

CDUAF:

2.81

LEG:

1.44

Total Revenue (TTM)

CDUAF:

CA$3.46B

LEG:

$3.03B

Gross Profit (TTM)

CDUAF:

CA$1.39B

LEG:

$717.40M

EBITDA (TTM)

CDUAF:

CA$1.76B

LEG:

$433.10M

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

CDUAF vs. LEG — Risk / Return Rank

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

CDUAF
CDUAF Risk / Return Rank: 9393
Overall Rank
CDUAF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CDUAF Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
CDUAF Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
CDUAF Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
CDUAF Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
Martin Ratio Rank

LEG
LEG Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
LEG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5252
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LEG Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
LEG Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
LEG Calmar Ratio Rank: 5353
Calmar Ratio Rank
LEG Martin Ratio Rank: 5353
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CDUAF vs. LEG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Canadian Utilities Limited (CDUAF) and Leggett & Platt, Incorporated (LEG). 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.


CDUAFLEGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.14

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.47

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.46

1.09

+0.36

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

7.16

0.44

+6.72

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.76

0.90

+16.86

CDUAF vs. LEG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CDUAF Sharpe Ratio is 2.39, which is higher than the LEG Sharpe Ratio of 0.25. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CDUAF and LEG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

CDUAF vs. LEG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CDUAF drawdown since its inception was -71.22%, smaller than the maximum LEG drawdown of -86.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CDUAF and LEG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CDUAFLEGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-71.22%

-86.41%

+15.19%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.35%

-28.51%

+23.16%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.91%

-77.26%

+56.35%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-31.94%

-84.96%

+53.02%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-41.92%

-86.41%

+44.49%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-16.18%

-77.60%

+61.42%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-39.86%

-19.65%

-20.21%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.15%

13.77%

-11.62%

Volatility

CDUAF vs. LEG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Canadian Utilities Limited (CDUAF) is 6.26%, while Leggett & Platt, Incorporated (LEG) has a volatility of 11.98%. This indicates that CDUAF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LEG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CDUAFLEGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.26%

11.98%

-5.72%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.73%

31.40%

-19.67%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.06%

49.76%

-33.70%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.07%

42.50%

-23.43%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

25.58%

39.81%

-14.23%

Dividends

CDUAF vs. LEG - Dividend Comparison

CDUAF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.62%, more than LEG's 1.89% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CDUAF
Canadian Utilities Limited
3.62%4.21%5.47%6.05%5.03%4.85%5.32%4.24%4.49%4.82%4.82%5.11%
LEG
Leggett & Platt, Incorporated
1.42%1.82%6.35%6.95%5.40%4.03%3.61%3.11%4.19%2.98%2.74%3.00%

Financials

CDUAF vs. LEG - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Canadian Utilities Limited and Leggett & Platt, Incorporated. You can select fields from income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements to easily visualize and compare the financial health of both companies.


Quarterly
Annual

Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities


0.00200.00M400.00M600.00M800.00M1.00B1.20B1.40B20222023202420252026
1.08B
0
(CDUAF) Total Revenue
(LEG) Total Revenue
Please note, different currencies. CDUAF values in CAD, LEG values in USD

Frequently Asked Questions


CDUAF and LEG have a correlation of -0.06, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LEG has higher volatility (11.98%) compared to CDUAF (6.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CDUAF dropped -71.22% vs LEG's -86.41%.

CDUAF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.39 vs 0.25), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CDUAF and LEG

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