CFLT vs. IONQ

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Confluent, Inc. (CFLT) and IonQ, Inc. (IONQ).

Performance

CFLT vs. IONQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Confluent, Inc. (CFLT) and IonQ, Inc. (IONQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

CFLT vs. IONQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
CFLT Confluent, Inc.	2.48%	8.15%	19.49%	5.22%	-70.83%	69.35%
IONQ IonQ, Inc.	-38.07%	7.42%	237.13%	259.13%	-79.34%	62.14%

Fundamentals

Market Cap CFLT : $10.90B IONQ : $10.25B
EPS CFLT : -$0.85 IONQ : -$1.67
PS Ratio CFLT : 9.20 IONQ : 65.15
PB Ratio CFLT : 9.33 IONQ : 2.70
Total Revenue (TTM) CFLT : $1.17B IONQ : $130.02M
Gross Profit (TTM) CFLT : $866.84M IONQ : $52.53M
EBITDA (TTM) CFLT : -$339.97M IONQ : -$429.34M

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CFLT achieves a 2.48% return, which is significantly higher than IONQ's -38.07% return.

CFLT

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.94%
• YTD: 2.48%
• 6M: 57.15%
• 1Y: 31.54%
• 3Y*: 12.30%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IONQ

• 1D: -3.61%
• 1M: -27.52%
• YTD: -38.07%
• 6M: -55.95%
• 1Y: 19.84%
• 3Y*: 65.32%
• 5Y*: 21.33%
• 10Y*: —

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

Return for Risk

CFLT vs. IONQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

CFLT

CFLT Risk / Return Rank: 51
CFLT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
CFLT Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
CFLT Omega Ratio Rank: 58
CFLT Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
CFLT Martin Ratio Rank: 52

IONQ

IONQ Risk / Return Rank: 52
IONQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
IONQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
IONQ Omega Ratio Rank: 52
IONQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
IONQ Martin Ratio Rank: 50

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.

CFLT vs. IONQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Confluent, Inc. (CFLT) and IonQ, Inc. (IONQ). 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.

	CFLT	IONQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.22	0.21	+0.01
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.76	1.10	-0.35
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.15	1.12	+0.03
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.42	0.38	+0.04
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	0.97	0.79	+0.19
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CFLT vs. IONQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CFLT Sharpe Ratio is 0.22, which is comparable to the IONQ Sharpe Ratio of 0.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CFLT and IONQ, 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

	CFLT	IONQ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.22	0.21	+0.01
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.22	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.10	0.20	-0.30

Correlation

The correlation between CFLT and IONQ is 0.43, 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.

Dividends

CFLT vs. IONQ - Dividend Comparison

Neither CFLT nor IONQ has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

CFLT vs. IONQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CFLT drawdown since its inception was -83.00%, smaller than the maximum IONQ drawdown of -90.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CFLT and IONQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	CFLT	IONQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-83.00%	-90.00%	+7.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-41.83%	-67.61%	+25.78%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-90.00%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-66.89%	-66.15%	-0.74%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-64.03%	-51.37%	-12.66%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	18.06%	32.93%	-14.87%

Volatility

CFLT vs. IONQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Confluent, Inc. (CFLT) is 1.22%, while IonQ, Inc. (IONQ) has a volatility of 16.41%. This indicates that CFLT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IONQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CFLT	IONQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.22%	16.41%	-15.19%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	33.33%	66.41%	-33.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	63.54%	96.74%	-33.20%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	76.23%	98.07%	-21.84%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	76.23%	96.97%	-20.74%

Financials