CFLT vs. ZS

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CFLT (Confluent, Inc.) and ZS (Zscaler, Inc.) are both stocks. Both operate in the Software - Infrastructure industry within the Technology sector. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined.

Performance

CFLT vs. ZS - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

CFLT

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ZS

• 1D: 0.66%
• 1M: -4.32%
• YTD: -39.86%
• 6M: -44.07%
• 1Y: -54.43%
• 3Y*: -2.97%
• 5Y*: -6.15%
• 10Y*: —

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

CFLT vs. ZS - 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%
ZS Zscaler, Inc.	-39.86%	24.67%	-18.57%	98.00%	-65.18%	46.30%

Correlation

The correlation between CFLT and ZS is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.26
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.47
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2021	0.58

Over the past year, the correlation between CFLT and ZS has dropped to 0.26 - well below their long-term average of 0.58, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Fundamentals

Market Cap CFLT : $10.90B ZS : $21.74B
EPS CFLT : -$0.85 ZS : -$0.49
PS Ratio CFLT : 9.20 ZS : 6.77
PB Ratio CFLT : 9.33 ZS : 9.19
Total Revenue (TTM) CFLT : $1.17B ZS : $3.17B
Gross Profit (TTM) CFLT : $866.84M ZS : $2.43B
EBITDA (TTM) CFLT : -$339.97M ZS : $69.08M

Return for Risk

CFLT vs. ZS — Risk / Return Rank

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

ZS

ZS Risk / Return Rank: 7
ZS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
ZS Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
ZS Omega Ratio Rank: 6
ZS Calmar Ratio Rank: 9
ZS Martin Ratio Rank: 5

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. ZS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CFLT	ZS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	-0.93	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	-0.11	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	—	0.32	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	CFLT	ZS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	—	-76.41%	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-64.89%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-64.89%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-76.41%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	—	-63.32%	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	—	-32.60%	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	35.64%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	CFLT	ZS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	45.55%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	57.24%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	58.55%	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	—	56.10%	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	—	58.44%	—

Dividends

CFLT vs. ZS - Dividend Comparison

Neither CFLT nor ZS has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Financials

CFLT vs. ZS - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Confluent, Inc. and Zscaler, Inc. over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

CFLT - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Confluent, Inc. reported a gross profit of 235.16M and revenue of 314.82M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 74.7%.

ZS - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Zscaler, Inc. reported a gross profit of 657.82M and revenue of 850.48M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 77.4%.

CFLT - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Confluent, Inc. reported an operating income of -99.17M and revenue of 314.82M, resulting in an operating margin of -31.5%.

ZS - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Zscaler, Inc. reported an operating income of -29.64M and revenue of 850.48M, resulting in an operating margin of -3.5%.

CFLT - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Confluent, Inc. reported a net income of -79.25M and revenue of 314.82M, resulting in a net margin of -25.2%.

ZS - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Zscaler, Inc. reported a net income of -13.88M and revenue of 850.48M, resulting in a net margin of -1.6%.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CFLT and ZS in my portfolio?

CFLT and ZS have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.