CENTA vs. CNQ
CENTA (Central Garden & Pet Company) and CNQ (Canadian Natural Resources Limited) are both stocks. CENTA operates in Packaged Foods (Consumer Defensive), while CNQ operates in Oil & Gas E&P (Energy). Over the past 10 years, CENTA returned 9.09%/yr vs 16.39%/yr for CNQ. At a 0.24 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
CENTA vs. CNQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CENTA achieves a 33.64% return, which is significantly higher than CNQ's 19.35% return. Over the past 10 years, CENTA has underperformed CNQ with an annualized return of 9.09%, while CNQ has yielded a comparatively higher 16.39% annualized return.
CENTA
- 1D
- -1.34%
- 1M
- 12.65%
- YTD
- 33.64%
- 6M
- 32.06%
- 1Y
- 25.96%
- 3Y*
- 11.15%
- 5Y*
- -0.11%
- 10Y*
- 9.09%
CNQ
- 1D
- 0.56%
- 1M
- -14.50%
- YTD
- 19.35%
- 6M
- 22.54%
- 1Y
- 32.20%
- 3Y*
- 18.60%
- 5Y*
- 23.02%
- 10Y*
- 16.39%
CENTA vs. CNQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CENTA Central Garden & Pet Company | 33.64% | -11.68% | -6.19% | 23.02% | -25.18% | 31.71% | 23.74% | -6.05% | -17.13% | 22.04% |
CNQ Canadian Natural Resources Limited | 19.35% | 15.58% | -1.31% | 23.72% | 42.82% | 83.55% | -19.06% | 39.72% | -29.92% | 15.97% |
Correlation
The correlation between CENTA and CNQ is 0.00, 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 | 0.00 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.10 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.17 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.20 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 6, 2007 | 0.24 |
Over the past year, the correlation between CENTA and CNQ has dropped to 0.00 - well below their long-term average of 0.24, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
Fundamentals
CENTA:
$2.42B
CNQ:
$83.01B
CENTA:
$2.74
CNQ:
CA$4.65
CENTA:
14.26
CNQ:
12.12
CENTA:
2.01
CNQ:
0.58
CENTA:
0.77
CNQ:
2.89
CENTA:
1.46
CNQ:
2.64
CENTA:
$3.16B
CNQ:
CA$40.74B
CENTA:
$1.02B
CNQ:
CA$12.53B
CENTA:
$268.85M
CNQ:
CA$22.99B
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
CENTA vs. CNQ — Risk / Return Rank
CENTA
CNQ
CENTA vs. CNQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Central Garden & Pet Company (CENTA) and Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNQ). 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.
| CENTA | CNQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.25 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.13 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.18 | 1.20 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.88 | 1.58 | -0.69 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.70 | 5.67 | -3.98 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CENTA vs. CNQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CENTA drawdown since its inception was -85.23%, which is greater than CNQ's maximum drawdown of -80.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CENTA and CNQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CENTA | CNQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -85.23% | -80.75% | -4.48% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -29.51% | -20.52% | -8.99% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -35.68% | -35.85% | +0.17% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -36.11% | -35.85% | -0.26% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -50.37% | -77.84% | +27.47% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -10.59% | -20.08% | +9.49% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -29.50% | -23.50% | -6.00% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 15.33% | 5.69% | +9.64% |
Volatility
CENTA vs. CNQ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Central Garden & Pet Company (CENTA) is 8.33%, while Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNQ) has a volatility of 9.38%. This indicates that CENTA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CENTA | CNQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.33% | 9.38% | -1.05% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.92% | 24.54% | -7.62% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 30.53% | 29.23% | +1.30% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.98% | 32.84% | -2.86% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 33.82% | 40.25% | -6.43% |
Dividends
CENTA vs. CNQ - Dividend Comparison
CENTA has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CNQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.46%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CENTA Central Garden & Pet Company | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
CNQ Canadian Natural Resources Limited | 4.46% | 5.01% | 5.02% | 4.17% | 6.31% | 3.78% | 5.26% | 3.49% | 4.56% | 3.08% | 2.94% | 4.21% |
Financials
CENTA vs. CNQ - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Central Garden & Pet Company and Canadian Natural Resources Limited. 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
CENTA vs. CNQ - Profitability Comparison
CENTA - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Central Garden & Pet Company reported a gross profit of 299.56M and revenue of 906.15M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 33.1%.
CNQ - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Canadian Natural Resources Limited reported a gross profit of 3.48B and revenue of 10.84B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 32.1%.
CENTA - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Central Garden & Pet Company reported an operating income of 113.94M and revenue of 906.15M, resulting in an operating margin of 12.6%.
CNQ - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Canadian Natural Resources Limited reported an operating income of 2.68B and revenue of 10.84B, resulting in an operating margin of 24.7%.
CENTA - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Central Garden & Pet Company reported a net income of 79.42M and revenue of 906.15M, resulting in a net margin of 8.8%.
CNQ - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Canadian Natural Resources Limited reported a net income of 1.35B and revenue of 10.84B, resulting in a net margin of 12.5%.
Frequently Asked Questions
CENTA and CNQ have a correlation of 0.00, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CNQ has higher volatility (9.38%) compared to CENTA (8.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CENTA dropped -85.23% vs CNQ's -80.75%.
CNQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.11 vs 0.86), 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 CENTA and CNQ
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