PortfoliosLab logo
PortfoliosLab logo
Tools
Performance Analysis
Portfolio Analysis
Factor Model
Portfolios
Lazy PortfoliosUser Portfolios
Discussions
CLMB vs. LRCX
Performance
Risk-Adjusted Performance
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility
Financials

Key characteristics


CLMBLRCX
YTD Return123.74%-5.05%
1Y Return165.31%7.32%
3Y Return (Ann)56.41%7.03%
5Y Return (Ann)58.06%22.71%
10Y Return (Ann)25.82%26.80%
Sharpe Ratio3.670.26
Sortino Ratio4.280.63
Omega Ratio1.551.08
Calmar Ratio6.310.31
Martin Ratio17.490.63
Ulcer Index10.22%17.18%
Daily Std Dev48.75%41.76%
Max Drawdown-89.12%-87.91%
Current Drawdown-0.55%-34.29%

Fundamentals


CLMBLRCX
Market Cap$558.16M$97.40B
EPS$3.70$3.09
PE Ratio32.7524.50
PEG Ratio3.041.47
Total Revenue (TTM)$410.63M$15.59B
Gross Profit (TTM)$79.17M$7.42B
EBITDA (TTM)$121.12M$4.89B

Correlation

-0.50.00.51.00.1

The correlation between CLMB and LRCX is 0.12, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Performance

CLMB vs. LRCX - Performance Comparison

In the year-to-date period, CLMB achieves a 123.74% return, which is significantly higher than LRCX's -5.05% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with CLMB having a 25.82% annualized return and LRCX not far ahead at 26.80%. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.


0.00%50.00%100.00%JuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovember
116.87%
-21.70%
CLMB
LRCX

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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


Risk-Adjusted Performance

CLMB vs. LRCX - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Climb Global Solutions (CLMB) and Lam Research Corporation (LRCX). 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.


CLMB
Sharpe ratio
The chart of Sharpe ratio for CLMB, currently valued at 3.67, compared to the broader market-4.00-2.000.002.004.003.67
Sortino ratio
The chart of Sortino ratio for CLMB, currently valued at 4.28, compared to the broader market-4.00-2.000.002.004.006.004.28
Omega ratio
The chart of Omega ratio for CLMB, currently valued at 1.55, compared to the broader market0.501.001.502.001.55
Calmar ratio
The chart of Calmar ratio for CLMB, currently valued at 6.31, compared to the broader market0.002.004.006.006.31
Martin ratio
The chart of Martin ratio for CLMB, currently valued at 17.49, compared to the broader market0.0010.0020.0030.0017.49
LRCX
Sharpe ratio
The chart of Sharpe ratio for LRCX, currently valued at 0.26, compared to the broader market-4.00-2.000.002.004.000.26
Sortino ratio
The chart of Sortino ratio for LRCX, currently valued at 0.63, compared to the broader market-4.00-2.000.002.004.006.000.63
Omega ratio
The chart of Omega ratio for LRCX, currently valued at 1.08, compared to the broader market0.501.001.502.001.08
Calmar ratio
The chart of Calmar ratio for LRCX, currently valued at 0.31, compared to the broader market0.002.004.006.000.31
Martin ratio
The chart of Martin ratio for LRCX, currently valued at 0.63, compared to the broader market0.0010.0020.0030.000.63

CLMB vs. LRCX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CLMB Sharpe Ratio is 3.67, which is higher than the LRCX Sharpe Ratio of 0.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CLMB and LRCX, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Rolling 12-month Sharpe Ratio0.001.002.003.004.00JuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovember
3.67
0.26
CLMB
LRCX

Dividends

CLMB vs. LRCX - Dividend Comparison

CLMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.56%, less than LRCX's 1.12% yield.


TTM20232022202120202019201820172016201520142013
CLMB
Climb Global Solutions
0.56%1.24%2.16%1.94%3.56%4.20%6.80%4.07%3.64%3.71%3.95%4.80%
LRCX
Lam Research Corporation
1.12%0.95%1.53%0.78%1.04%1.54%2.79%1.01%1.28%1.36%0.68%0.00%

Drawdowns

CLMB vs. LRCX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CLMB drawdown since its inception was -89.12%, roughly equal to the maximum LRCX drawdown of -87.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLMB and LRCX. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.


-40.00%-30.00%-20.00%-10.00%0.00%JuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovember
-0.55%
-34.29%
CLMB
LRCX

Volatility

CLMB vs. LRCX - Volatility Comparison

Climb Global Solutions (CLMB) has a higher volatility of 15.37% compared to Lam Research Corporation (LRCX) at 10.64%. This indicates that CLMB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LRCX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


10.00%15.00%20.00%25.00%JuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovember
15.37%
10.64%
CLMB
LRCX

Financials

CLMB vs. LRCX - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Climb Global Solutions and Lam Research Corporation. 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



Values in USD except per share items