CLF vs. MARA
CLF (Cleveland-Cliffs Inc.) and MARA (MARA Holdings, Inc.) are both stocks. CLF operates in Steel (Basic Materials), while MARA operates in Capital Markets (Financial Services). Over the past 10 years, CLF returned 11.73%/yr vs -10.09%/yr for MARA. At a 0.20 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
CLF vs. MARA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CLF achieves a 3.77% return, which is significantly lower than MARA's 56.79% return. Over the past 10 years, CLF has outperformed MARA with an annualized return of 11.73%, while MARA has yielded a comparatively lower -10.09% annualized return.
CLF
- 1D
- 0.51%
- 1M
- 25.39%
- YTD
- 3.77%
- 6M
- 8.42%
- 1Y
- 91.92%
- 3Y*
- -6.24%
- 5Y*
- -10.83%
- 10Y*
- 11.73%
MARA
- 1D
- 3.45%
- 1M
- 10.43%
- YTD
- 56.79%
- 6M
- 22.22%
- 1Y
- -11.00%
- 3Y*
- 13.30%
- 5Y*
- -11.91%
- 10Y*
- -10.09%
CLF vs. MARA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLF Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. | 3.77% | 41.28% | -53.97% | 26.75% | -26.00% | 49.52% | 77.38% | 12.72% | 6.66% | -14.27% |
MARA MARA Holdings, Inc. | 56.79% | -46.45% | -28.61% | 586.84% | -89.59% | 214.75% | 1,084.48% | -39.16% | -91.17% | -40.41% |
Correlation
The correlation between CLF and MARA is 0.33, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.33 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.31 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.32 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.25 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 4, 2012 | 0.20 |
The correlation between CLF and MARA shifts across timeframes, from 0.20 (all time) to 0.33 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Fundamentals
CLF:
$7.78B
MARA:
$5.35B
CLF:
-$2.37
MARA:
-$4.95
CLF:
0.37
MARA:
6.68
CLF:
$18.90B
MARA:
$867.82M
CLF:
-$528.00M
MARA:
$164.95M
CLF:
$134.00M
MARA:
$373.68M
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
CLF vs. MARA — Risk / Return Rank
CLF
MARA
CLF vs. MARA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. (CLF) and MARA Holdings, Inc. (MARA). 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.
| CLF | MARA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.49 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.54 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 1.04 | +0.21 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.79 | -0.16 | +1.95 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.68 | -0.26 | +3.94 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CLF vs. MARA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CLF drawdown since its inception was -98.78%, roughly equal to the maximum MARA drawdown of -99.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLF and MARA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CLF | MARA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -98.78% | -99.74% | +0.96% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -51.67% | -70.53% | +18.86% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -74.46% | -78.34% | +3.88% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -82.37% | -95.87% | +13.50% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -82.37% | -99.20% | +16.83% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -85.95% | -90.90% | +4.95% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -47.62% | -78.00% | +30.38% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 25.06% | 42.56% | -17.50% |
Volatility
CLF vs. MARA - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. (CLF) is 22.19%, while MARA Holdings, Inc. (MARA) has a volatility of 23.71%. This indicates that CLF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MARA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CLF | MARA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 22.19% | 23.71% | -1.52% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 47.32% | 60.50% | -13.18% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 68.48% | 79.29% | -10.81% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 59.28% | 105.98% | -46.70% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 62.12% | 144.15% | -82.03% |
Dividends
CLF vs. MARA - Dividend Comparison
Neither CLF nor MARA has paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLF Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.82% | 3.10% |
MARA MARA Holdings, Inc. | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Financials
CLF vs. MARA - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. and MARA Holdings, Inc.. 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
Frequently Asked Questions
CLF and MARA have a correlation of 0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MARA has higher volatility (23.71%) compared to CLF (22.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CLF dropped -98.78% vs MARA's -99.74%.
CLF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.35 vs -0.14), 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 CLF and MARA
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