PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CLS vs. CIFR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends
Financials

Performance

CLS vs. CIFR - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CLS achieves a 32.99% return, which is significantly lower than CIFR's 65.99% return.


CLS

1D
1.88%
1M
9.64%
YTD
32.99%
6M
28.26%
1Y
213.67%
3Y*
207.28%
5Y*
116.26%
10Y*
43.71%

CIFR

1D
8.26%
1M
20.51%
YTD
65.99%
6M
43.70%
1Y
558.60%
3Y*
113.71%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CLS vs. CIFR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
CLS
Celestica Inc.
32.99%220.27%215.23%159.80%1.26%16.91%
CIFR
Cipher Digital Inc.
65.99%218.10%12.35%637.50%-87.90%-54.65%

Correlation

The correlation between CLS and CIFR is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.35

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

0.35

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 30, 2021

0.31

Fundamentals

Market Cap

CLS:

$45.48B

CIFR:

$9.93B

EPS

CLS:

$8.28

CIFR:

-$2.33

PS Ratio

CLS:

3.30

CIFR:

53.84

PB Ratio

CLS:

21.68

CIFR:

13.90

Total Revenue (TTM)

CLS:

$13.81B

CIFR:

$174.98M

Gross Profit (TTM)

CLS:

$1.60B

CIFR:

-$172.84M

EBITDA (TTM)

CLS:

$1.32B

CIFR:

-$169.22M

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

CLS vs. CIFR — Risk / Return Rank

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

CLS
CLS Risk / Return Rank: 9292
Overall Rank
CLS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CLS Sortino Ratio Rank: 8888
Sortino Ratio Rank
CLS Omega Ratio Rank: 8888
Omega Ratio Rank
CLS Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
CLS Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
Martin Ratio Rank

CIFR
CIFR Risk / Return Rank: 9696
Overall Rank
CIFR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9999
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CIFR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9595
Sortino Ratio Rank
CIFR Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
CIFR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
CIFR Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
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.

CLS vs. CIFR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Celestica Inc. (CLS) and Cipher Digital Inc. (CIFR). 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.


CLSCIFRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.19

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.05

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

1.45

-0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.91

10.56

-3.65

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.83

21.19

-4.36

CLS vs. CIFR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CLS Sharpe Ratio is 2.78, which is lower than the CIFR Sharpe Ratio of 4.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CLS and CIFR, 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...

Drawdowns

CLS vs. CIFR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CLS drawdown since its inception was -96.93%, roughly equal to the maximum CIFR drawdown of -97.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLS and CIFR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CLSCIFRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-96.93%

-97.16%

+0.23%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-29.24%

-51.38%

+22.14%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-53.96%

-71.74%

+17.78%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-53.96%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-80.60%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-16.78%

-6.81%

-9.97%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-73.31%

-66.24%

-7.07%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

11.98%

25.57%

-13.59%

Volatility

CLS vs. CIFR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Celestica Inc. (CLS) is 27.54%, while Cipher Digital Inc. (CIFR) has a volatility of 31.19%. This indicates that CLS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CIFR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CLSCIFRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

27.54%

31.19%

-3.65%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

55.42%

72.25%

-16.83%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

72.65%

109.30%

-36.65%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

57.70%

121.97%

-64.27%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

49.97%

121.97%

-72.00%

Dividends

CLS vs. CIFR - Dividend Comparison

Neither CLS nor CIFR has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Financials

CLS vs. CIFR - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Celestica Inc. and Cipher Digital 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.


Quarterly
Annual

Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities


0.001.00B2.00B3.00B4.00B20222023202420252026
4.05B
0
(CLS) Total Revenue
(CIFR) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

Frequently Asked Questions


CLS and CIFR have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CIFR has higher volatility (31.19%) compared to CLS (27.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CLS dropped -96.93% vs CIFR's -97.16%.

CIFR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.98 vs 2.78), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CLS and CIFR

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