CLS vs. MRVL
CLS (Celestica Inc.) and MRVL (Marvell Technology, Inc.) are both stocks. Both are in the Technology sector — CLS in Electronic Components, MRVL in Semiconductors. Over the past 10 years, CLS returned 43.71%/yr vs 40.68%/yr for MRVL. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
CLS vs. MRVL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CLS achieves a 32.99% return, which is significantly lower than MRVL's 229.54% return. Over the past 10 years, CLS has outperformed MRVL with an annualized return of 43.71%, while MRVL has yielded a comparatively lower 40.68% annualized return.
CLS
- 1D
- 1.88%
- 1M
- 5.52%
- YTD
- 32.99%
- 6M
- 28.26%
- 1Y
- 200.71%
- 3Y*
- 207.28%
- 5Y*
- 116.26%
- 10Y*
- 43.71%
MRVL
- 1D
- -0.36%
- 1M
- 57.18%
- YTD
- 229.54%
- 6M
- 231.70%
- 1Y
- 302.72%
- 3Y*
- 64.86%
- 5Y*
- 40.49%
- 10Y*
- 40.68%
CLS vs. MRVL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLS Celestica Inc. | 32.99% | 220.27% | 215.23% | 159.80% | 1.26% | 37.92% | -2.42% | -5.70% | -16.32% | -11.56% |
MRVL Marvell Technology, Inc. | 229.54% | -22.82% | 83.79% | 63.68% | -57.48% | 84.62% | 80.25% | 65.74% | -23.62% | 56.89% |
Correlation
The correlation between CLS and MRVL is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.40 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.49 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.50 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.44 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2000 | 0.42 |
The correlation between CLS and MRVL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.40 to 0.50 - a consistent structural relationship.
Fundamentals
CLS:
$45.48B
MRVL:
$249.86B
CLS:
$8.28
MRVL:
$2.90
CLS:
47.45
MRVL:
96.58
CLS:
0.64
MRVL:
0.18
CLS:
3.30
MRVL:
27.99
CLS:
21.68
MRVL:
13.72
CLS:
$13.81B
MRVL:
$8.72B
CLS:
$1.60B
MRVL:
$4.41B
CLS:
$1.32B
MRVL:
$4.27B
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. MRVL — Risk / Return Rank
CLS
MRVL
CLS vs. MRVL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Celestica Inc. (CLS) and Marvell Technology, Inc. (MRVL). 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.
| CLS | MRVL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.52 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.26 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | 1.55 | -0.18 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 6.91 | 11.57 | -4.66 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 16.83 | 26.42 | -9.59 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CLS vs. MRVL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CLS drawdown since its inception was -96.93%, which is greater than MRVL's maximum drawdown of -91.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLS and MRVL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CLS | MRVL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -96.93% | -91.60% | -5.33% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -29.24% | -26.36% | -2.88% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -53.96% | -60.79% | +6.83% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -53.96% | -61.88% | +7.92% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -80.60% | -61.88% | -18.72% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -16.78% | -11.61% | -5.17% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -73.31% | -46.74% | -26.57% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.98% | 11.52% | +0.46% |
Volatility
CLS vs. MRVL - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Celestica Inc. (CLS) is 27.54%, while Marvell Technology, Inc. (MRVL) has a volatility of 40.61%. This indicates that CLS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MRVL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CLS | MRVL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 27.54% | 40.61% | -13.07% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 55.42% | 55.42% | 0.00% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 72.65% | 70.94% | +1.71% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 57.70% | 61.82% | -4.12% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 49.97% | 51.94% | -1.97% |
Dividends
CLS vs. MRVL - Dividend Comparison
CLS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MRVL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.09%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLS Celestica Inc. | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
MRVL Marvell Technology, Inc. | 0.09% | 0.28% | 0.22% | 0.40% | 0.65% | 0.21% | 0.50% | 0.90% | 1.48% | 1.12% | 1.73% | 2.72% |
Financials
CLS vs. MRVL - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Celestica Inc. and Marvell Technology, 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
CLS vs. MRVL - Profitability Comparison
CLS - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Celestica Inc. reported a gross profit of 437.20M and revenue of 4.05B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 10.8%.
MRVL - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Marvell Technology, Inc. reported a gross profit of 1.26B and revenue of 2.42B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 52.2%.
CLS - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Celestica Inc. reported an operating income of 272.10M and revenue of 4.05B, resulting in an operating margin of 6.7%.
MRVL - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Marvell Technology, Inc. reported an operating income of 339.40M and revenue of 2.42B, resulting in an operating margin of 14.0%.
CLS - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Celestica Inc. reported a net income of 212.30M and revenue of 4.05B, resulting in a net margin of 5.3%.
MRVL - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Marvell Technology, Inc. reported a net income of 34.50M and revenue of 2.42B, resulting in a net margin of 1.4%.
Frequently Asked Questions
CLS and MRVL have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MRVL has higher volatility (40.61%) compared to CLS (27.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CLS dropped -96.93% vs MRVL's -91.60%.
MRVL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.30 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.
Find the right allocation for CLS and MRVL
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