PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CHRT.L vs. SMIN.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends
Financials

Performance

CHRT.L vs. SMIN.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Cohort plc (CHRT.L) and Smiths Group PLC (SMIN.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CHRT.L achieves a 41.48% return, which is significantly higher than SMIN.L's 7.61% return. Over the past 10 years, CHRT.L has outperformed SMIN.L with an annualized return of 16.72%, while SMIN.L has yielded a comparatively lower 11.29% annualized return.


CHRT.L

1D
1.59%
1M
10.19%
YTD
41.48%
6M
19.26%
1Y
-16.02%
3Y*
41.19%
5Y*
17.88%
10Y*
16.72%

SMIN.L

1D
1.78%
1M
-0.32%
YTD
7.61%
6M
2.97%
1Y
15.25%
3Y*
18.47%
5Y*
12.90%
10Y*
11.29%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CHRT.L vs. SMIN.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CHRT.L
Cohort plc
41.48%-15.64%99.97%13.45%-3.81%-14.13%-10.63%94.12%14.53%-15.82%
SMIN.L
Smiths Group PLC
7.61%39.71%0.12%13.23%3.97%7.69%-8.47%27.37%-5.41%8.15%

Correlation

The correlation between CHRT.L and SMIN.L is 0.16, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.16

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

0.10

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

0.07

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

0.07

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 9, 2006

0.06

The correlation between CHRT.L and SMIN.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.06 (all time) to 0.16 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Fundamentals

Market Cap

CHRT.L:

£593.44M

SMIN.L:

£8.13B

EPS

CHRT.L:

£0.81

SMIN.L:

£1.70

PE Ratio

CHRT.L:

15.76

SMIN.L:

14.84

PEG Ratio

CHRT.L:

0.41

SMIN.L:

0.04

PS Ratio

CHRT.L:

1.17

SMIN.L:

1.52

PB Ratio

CHRT.L:

3.59

SMIN.L:

4.91

Total Revenue (TTM)

CHRT.L:

£507.09M

SMIN.L:

£5.46B

Gross Profit (TTM)

CHRT.L:

£152.43M

SMIN.L:

£1.39B

EBITDA (TTM)

CHRT.L:

£68.05M

SMIN.L:

£965.00M

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

CHRT.L vs. SMIN.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

CHRT.L
CHRT.L Risk / Return Rank: 2929
Overall Rank
CHRT.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2727
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CHRT.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2828
Sortino Ratio Rank
CHRT.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2828
Omega Ratio Rank
CHRT.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3131
Calmar Ratio Rank
CHRT.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
Martin Ratio Rank

SMIN.L
SMIN.L Risk / Return Rank: 5959
Overall Rank
SMIN.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6363
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SMIN.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5555
Sortino Ratio Rank
SMIN.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5858
Omega Ratio Rank
SMIN.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5656
Calmar Ratio Rank
SMIN.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
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.

CHRT.L vs. SMIN.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cohort plc (CHRT.L) and Smiths Group PLC (SMIN.L). 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.


CHRT.LSMIN.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.01

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.15

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.98

1.15

-0.17

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.33

0.66

-0.99

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.58

2.58

-3.16

CHRT.L vs. SMIN.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CHRT.L Sharpe Ratio is -0.32, which is lower than the SMIN.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.69. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CHRT.L and SMIN.L, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CHRT.LSMIN.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.32

0.69

-1.01

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.44

0.58

-0.14

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.48

0.44

+0.04

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.46

0.28

+0.18

Drawdowns

CHRT.L vs. SMIN.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CHRT.L drawdown since its inception was -72.53%, which is greater than SMIN.L's maximum drawdown of -60.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CHRT.L and SMIN.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CHRT.LSMIN.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-72.53%

-60.05%

-12.48%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-48.22%

-22.87%

-25.35%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-48.22%

-22.87%

-25.35%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-48.22%

-22.87%

-25.35%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-48.22%

-53.96%

+5.74%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-25.92%

-7.83%

-18.09%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-19.50%

-16.36%

-3.14%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

27.70%

5.89%

+21.81%

Volatility

CHRT.L vs. SMIN.L - Volatility Comparison

Cohort plc (CHRT.L) has a higher volatility of 20.91% compared to Smiths Group PLC (SMIN.L) at 6.88%. This indicates that CHRT.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SMIN.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CHRT.LSMIN.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

20.91%

6.88%

+14.03%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

36.58%

20.37%

+16.21%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

49.95%

22.20%

+27.75%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

40.90%

22.38%

+18.52%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

35.01%

25.88%

+9.13%

Dividends

CHRT.L vs. SMIN.L - Dividend Comparison

CHRT.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.32%, less than SMIN.L's 1.86% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CHRT.L
Cohort plc
1.32%1.80%1.36%2.41%2.43%1.42%2.15%1.26%2.16%2.09%1.46%1.31%
SMIN.L
Smiths Group PLC
1.86%1.96%2.55%2.36%2.48%2.39%2.33%2.72%3.27%2.90%2.97%4.36%

Financials

CHRT.L vs. SMIN.L - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Cohort plc and Smiths Group PLC. 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


0.00500.00M1.00B1.50BJulyOctober2022AprilJulyOctober2023AprilJulyOctober2024AprilJulyOctober2025AprilJulyOctober2026
128.82M
915.00M
(CHRT.L) Total Revenue
(SMIN.L) Total Revenue
Values in GBp except per share items

CHRT.L vs. SMIN.L - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Cohort plc and Smiths Group PLC over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

Gross Margin
Operating Margin
Net Margin
Quarterly
Annual

-10.0%0.0%10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%JulyOctober2022AprilJulyOctober2023AprilJulyOctober2024AprilJulyOctober2025AprilJulyOctober2026
27.2%
40.6%
Portfolio components
CHRT.L - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Cohort plc reported a gross profit of 35.06M and revenue of 128.82M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 27.2%.

SMIN.L - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Smiths Group PLC reported a gross profit of 371.00M and revenue of 915.00M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 40.6%.

CHRT.L - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Cohort plc reported an operating income of 8.20M and revenue of 128.82M, resulting in an operating margin of 6.4%.

SMIN.L - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Smiths Group PLC reported an operating income of 164.00M and revenue of 915.00M, resulting in an operating margin of 17.9%.

CHRT.L - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Cohort plc reported a net income of 6.11M and revenue of 128.82M, resulting in a net margin of 4.8%.

SMIN.L - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Smiths Group PLC reported a net income of 130.00M and revenue of 915.00M, resulting in a net margin of 14.2%.


Frequently Asked Questions


CHRT.L and SMIN.L have a correlation of 0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CHRT.L and SMIN.L

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