CLS.TO vs. SANM

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Celestica Inc. (CLS.TO) and Sanmina Corporation (SANM).

Performance

CLS.TO vs. SANM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Celestica Inc. (CLS.TO) and Sanmina Corporation (SANM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

CLS.TO vs. SANM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CLS.TO Celestica Inc.	-1.41%	206.05%	241.82%	154.33%	8.23%	37.29%	-4.64%	-9.95%	-9.26%	-17.16%
SANM Sanmina Corporation	-12.15%	89.23%	59.96%	-12.31%	48.03%	28.83%	-8.44%	35.32%	-20.91%	-15.69%

Different Trading Currencies

CLS.TO is traded in CAD, while SANM is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the SANM values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.

Fundamentals

Market Cap CLS.TO : CA$46.39B SANM : $7.23B
EPS CLS.TO : CA$7.19 SANM : $4.20
PE Ratio CLS.TO : 55.65 SANM : 31.01
PEG Ratio CLS.TO : 0.75 SANM : 6.77
PS Ratio CLS.TO : 3.74 SANM : 0.77
PB Ratio CLS.TO : 20.97 SANM : 0.99
Total Revenue (TTM) CLS.TO : CA$12.41B SANM : $9.31B
Gross Profit (TTM) CLS.TO : CA$1.44B SANM : $790.80M
EBITDA (TTM) CLS.TO : CA$1.21B SANM : $429.31M

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CLS.TO achieves a -1.41% return, which is significantly higher than SANM's -12.15% return. Over the past 10 years, CLS.TO has outperformed SANM with an annualized return of 39.53%, while SANM has yielded a comparatively lower 19.54% annualized return.

CLS.TO

• 1D: 2.01%
• 1M: 9.67%
• YTD: -1.41%
• 6M: 13.98%
• 1Y: 253.99%
• 3Y*: 184.24%
• 5Y*: 105.47%
• 10Y*: 39.53%

SANM

• 1D: 0.28%
• 1M: -7.03%
• YTD: -12.15%
• 6M: 11.41%
• 1Y: 66.33%
• 3Y*: 29.95%
• 5Y*: 27.89%
• 10Y*: 19.54%

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

Return for Risk

CLS.TO vs. SANM — Risk / Return Rank

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

CLS.TO

CLS.TO Risk / Return Rank: 95
CLS.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
CLS.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
CLS.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 92
CLS.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
CLS.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 97

SANM

SANM Risk / Return Rank: 76
SANM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
SANM Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
SANM Omega Ratio Rank: 76
SANM Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
SANM Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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.

CLS.TO vs. SANM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Celestica Inc. (CLS.TO) and Sanmina Corporation (SANM). 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.

	CLS.TO	SANM	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	3.59	1.02	+2.57
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.25	1.71	+1.54
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	1.25	+0.20
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.97	1.94	+6.02
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	20.79	5.17	+15.63
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CLS.TO vs. SANM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CLS.TO Sharpe Ratio is 3.59, which is higher than the SANM Sharpe Ratio of 1.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CLS.TO and SANM, 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

	CLS.TO	SANM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.59	1.02	+2.57
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.95	0.67	+1.27
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.83	0.49	+0.35
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.19	0.56	-0.37

Correlation

The correlation between CLS.TO and SANM is 0.46, 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

CLS.TO vs. SANM - Dividend Comparison

Neither CLS.TO nor SANM has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

CLS.TO vs. SANM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CLS.TO drawdown since its inception was -97.34%, which is greater than SANM's maximum drawdown of -66.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLS.TO and SANM.

Drawdown Indicators

	CLS.TO	SANM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-97.34%	-99.66%	+2.32%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-31.71%	-32.69%	+0.98%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-54.25%	-33.92%	-20.33%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-79.32%	-55.85%	-23.47%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-19.49%	-63.23%	+43.74%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-76.05%	-71.63%	-4.42%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	12.15%	12.24%	-0.09%

Volatility

CLS.TO vs. SANM - Volatility Comparison

Celestica Inc. (CLS.TO) has a higher volatility of 23.26% compared to Sanmina Corporation (SANM) at 17.47%. This indicates that CLS.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SANM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CLS.TO	SANM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	23.26%	17.47%	+5.79%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	54.03%	54.76%	-0.73%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	71.24%	65.14%	+6.10%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	54.53%	41.59%	+12.94%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	47.61%	40.18%	+7.43%

Financials

CLS.TO vs. SANM - Profitability Comparison

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

CLS.TO - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Celestica Inc. reported a gross profit of 427.57M and revenue of 3.71B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 11.5%.

SANM - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Sanmina Corporation reported a gross profit of 242.36M and revenue of 3.19B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 7.6%.

CLS.TO - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Celestica Inc. reported an operating income of 325.73M and revenue of 3.71B, resulting in an operating margin of 8.8%.

SANM - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Sanmina Corporation reported an operating income of 73.60M and revenue of 3.19B, resulting in an operating margin of 2.3%.

CLS.TO - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Celestica Inc. reported a net income of 271.61M and revenue of 3.71B, resulting in a net margin of 7.3%.

SANM - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Sanmina Corporation reported a net income of 49.29M and revenue of 3.19B, resulting in a net margin of 1.6%.