PortfoliosLab logo
CENTA vs. CNQ
Performance
Risk-Adjusted Performance
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility
Financials

Correlation

The correlation between CENTA and CNQ is 0.47, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.


Performance

CENTA vs. CNQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Central Garden & Pet Company (CENTA) and Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading data...

Key characteristics

Sharpe Ratio

CENTA:

-0.48

CNQ:

-0.50

Sortino Ratio

CENTA:

-0.73

CNQ:

-0.61

Omega Ratio

CENTA:

0.92

CNQ:

0.93

Calmar Ratio

CENTA:

-0.51

CNQ:

-0.49

Martin Ratio

CENTA:

-1.12

CNQ:

-1.22

Ulcer Index

CENTA:

16.07%

CNQ:

14.44%

Daily Std Dev

CENTA:

30.33%

CNQ:

31.69%

Max Drawdown

CENTA:

-85.23%

CNQ:

-81.12%

Current Drawdown

CENTA:

-26.73%

CNQ:

-22.50%

Fundamentals

Market Cap

CENTA:

$2.08B

CNQ:

$64.48B

EPS

CENTA:

$1.88

CNQ:

$2.58

PE Ratio

CENTA:

17.03

CNQ:

11.93

PEG Ratio

CENTA:

2.54

CNQ:

12.75

PS Ratio

CENTA:

0.66

CNQ:

1.68

PB Ratio

CENTA:

1.32

CNQ:

2.19

Total Revenue (TTM)

CENTA:

$3.16B

CNQ:

$43.23B

Gross Profit (TTM)

CENTA:

$954.79M

CNQ:

$12.09B

EBITDA (TTM)

CENTA:

$310.02M

CNQ:

$18.38B

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CENTA achieves a -3.27% return, which is significantly lower than CNQ's -0.29% return. Over the past 10 years, CENTA has outperformed CNQ with an annualized return of 14.95%, while CNQ has yielded a comparatively lower 12.11% annualized return.


CENTA

YTD

-3.27%

1M

8.12%

6M

-5.39%

1Y

-14.34%

3Y*

-1.90%

5Y*

3.13%

10Y*

14.95%

CNQ

YTD

-0.29%

1M

5.86%

6M

-7.85%

1Y

-15.81%

3Y*

2.40%

5Y*

34.14%

10Y*

12.11%

*Annualized

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Central Garden & Pet Company

Go deeper with the Portfolio Analysis tool — backtest performance, assess risk, compare to benchmarks, and more

Risk-Adjusted Performance

CENTA vs. CNQ — Risk-Adjusted Performance Rank

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

CENTA
The Risk-Adjusted Performance Rank of CENTA is 2020
Overall Rank
The Sharpe Ratio Rank of CENTA is 2323
Sharpe Ratio Rank
The Sortino Ratio Rank of CENTA is 1717
Sortino Ratio Rank
The Omega Ratio Rank of CENTA is 1919
Omega Ratio Rank
The Calmar Ratio Rank of CENTA is 1818
Calmar Ratio Rank
The Martin Ratio Rank of CENTA is 2121
Martin Ratio Rank

CNQ
The Risk-Adjusted Performance Rank of CNQ is 1919
Overall Rank
The Sharpe Ratio Rank of CNQ is 2222
Sharpe Ratio Rank
The Sortino Ratio Rank of CNQ is 1919
Sortino Ratio Rank
The Omega Ratio Rank of CNQ is 2020
Omega Ratio Rank
The Calmar Ratio Rank of CNQ is 1919
Calmar Ratio Rank
The Martin Ratio Rank of CNQ is 1616
Martin Ratio Rank
The risk-adjusted ranks indicate the investment's position relative to the market. A rank closer to 100 signifies top-performing investments, while a rank closer to 0 might suggest underperformance, based on the selected ratio. The values are calculated based on the past 12 months of returns.

CENTA vs. CNQ - Risk-Adjusted Performance 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.


The current CENTA Sharpe Ratio is -0.48, which is comparable to the CNQ Sharpe Ratio of -0.50. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CENTA and CNQ, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading data...

Go to the full Sharpe Ratio tool to analyze any stock or portfolio. Customize time frames, set your own risk-free rate, and more

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 5.16%.


TTM20242023202220212020201920182017201620152014
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
5.16%5.02%4.17%6.31%3.70%5.15%3.42%5.92%2.34%2.20%3.21%2.58%

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 -81.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CENTA and CNQ.


Loading data...

Go to the full Drawdowns tool for more analysis options, including inflation-adjusted drawdowns, and more

Volatility

CENTA vs. CNQ - Volatility Comparison

Central Garden & Pet Company (CENTA) and Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNQ) have volatilities of 8.18% and 8.33%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading data...

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.


Quarterly
Annual

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


0.002.00B4.00B6.00B8.00B10.00B12.00B14.00B20212022202320242025
833.54M
12.71B
(CENTA) Total Revenue
(CNQ) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

CENTA vs. CNQ - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Central Garden & Pet Company and Canadian Natural Resources Limited over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

Gross Margin
Operating Margin
Net Margin
Quarterly
Annual

-20.0%-10.0%0.0%10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%20212022202320242025
32.8%
28.0%
(CENTA) Gross Margin
(CNQ) Gross Margin
CENTA - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on May 2025, Central Garden & Pet Company reported a gross profit of 273.08M and revenue of 833.54M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 32.8%.

CNQ - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on May 2025, Canadian Natural Resources Limited reported a gross profit of 3.56B and revenue of 12.71B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 28.0%.

CENTA - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on May 2025, Central Garden & Pet Company reported an operating income of 93.32M and revenue of 833.54M, resulting in an operating margin of 11.2%.

CNQ - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on May 2025, Canadian Natural Resources Limited reported an operating income of 3.29B and revenue of 12.71B, resulting in an operating margin of 25.9%.

CENTA - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on May 2025, Central Garden & Pet Company reported a net income of 63.63M and revenue of 833.54M, resulting in a net margin of 7.6%.

CNQ - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on May 2025, Canadian Natural Resources Limited reported a net income of 2.46B and revenue of 12.71B, resulting in a net margin of 19.3%.