PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CMT vs. AMRX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends
Financials

Performance

CMT vs. AMRX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Core Molding Technologies, Inc. (CMT) and Amneal Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (AMRX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CMT achieves a 17.26% return, which is significantly higher than AMRX's 2.18% return. Over the past 10 years, CMT has outperformed AMRX with an annualized return of 6.61%, while AMRX has yielded a comparatively lower -9.35% annualized return.


CMT

1D
0.81%
1M
-8.38%
YTD
17.26%
6M
22.45%
1Y
46.21%
3Y*
6.65%
5Y*
13.07%
10Y*
6.61%

AMRX

1D
1.78%
1M
-1.79%
YTD
2.18%
6M
5.71%
1Y
72.82%
3Y*
71.55%
5Y*
18.72%
10Y*
-9.35%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CMT vs. AMRX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CMT
Core Molding Technologies, Inc.
17.26%21.22%-10.74%42.65%52.64%-39.56%333.23%-54.29%-67.03%27.42%
AMRX
Amneal Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
2.18%59.09%30.48%205.03%-58.46%4.81%-5.19%-64.38%-18.74%25.66%

Correlation

The correlation between CMT and AMRX is 0.19, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.19

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

0.19

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.18

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.12

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 16, 2009

0.14

Fundamentals

EPS

CMT:

$1.48

AMRX:

$0.38

PE Ratio

CMT:

15.89

AMRX:

34.22

PEG Ratio

CMT:

0.36

AMRX:

1.19

PS Ratio

CMT:

0.56

AMRX:

1.37

Total Revenue (TTM)

CMT:

$270.93M

AMRX:

$3.05B

Gross Profit (TTM)

CMT:

$44.31M

AMRX:

$1.18B

EBITDA (TTM)

CMT:

$18.05M

AMRX:

$626.02M

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

CMT vs. AMRX — Risk / Return Rank

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

CMT
CMT Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
CMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
CMT Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
CMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 7777
Calmar Ratio Rank
CMT Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
Martin Ratio Rank

AMRX
AMRX Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
AMRX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AMRX Sortino Ratio Rank: 8888
Sortino Ratio Rank
AMRX Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
AMRX Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
AMRX Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
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.

CMT vs. AMRX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Core Molding Technologies, Inc. (CMT) and Amneal Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (AMRX). 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.


CMTAMRXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.18

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.23

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.21

1.37

-0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.33

3.29

-0.96

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.69

8.19

-3.51

CMT vs. AMRX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CMT Sharpe Ratio is 1.13, which is lower than the AMRX Sharpe Ratio of 2.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CMT and AMRX, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CMTAMRXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.13

2.32

-1.18

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.29

0.37

-0.08

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.11

-0.14

+0.25

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.06

0.10

-0.05

Drawdowns

CMT vs. AMRX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CMT drawdown since its inception was -96.21%, roughly equal to the maximum AMRX drawdown of -97.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CMT and AMRX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CMTAMRXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-96.21%

-97.52%

+1.31%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-19.89%

-22.25%

+2.36%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-55.95%

-26.80%

-29.15%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-55.95%

-78.90%

+22.95%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-95.45%

-96.28%

+0.83%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-20.71%

-74.91%

+54.20%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-53.35%

-54.31%

+0.96%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

9.89%

8.92%

+0.97%

Volatility

CMT vs. AMRX - Volatility Comparison

Core Molding Technologies, Inc. (CMT) has a higher volatility of 12.71% compared to Amneal Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (AMRX) at 9.50%. This indicates that CMT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AMRX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CMTAMRXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

12.71%

9.50%

+3.21%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

33.25%

22.37%

+10.88%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

40.96%

31.62%

+9.34%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

44.99%

50.91%

-5.92%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

61.39%

65.26%

-3.87%

Dividends

CMT vs. AMRX - Dividend Comparison

Neither CMT nor AMRX has paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
AMRX
Amneal Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
CMT
Core Molding Technologies, Inc.
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%1.41%0.46%

Financials

CMT vs. AMRX - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Core Molding Technologies, Inc. and Amneal Pharmaceuticals, 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


0.00200.00M400.00M600.00M800.00M20222023202420252026
58.58M
722.52M
(CMT) Total Revenue
(AMRX) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

CMT vs. AMRX - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Core Molding Technologies, Inc. and Amneal Pharmaceuticals, Inc. over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

Gross Margin
Operating Margin
Net Margin
Quarterly
Annual

10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%20222023202420252026
20.5%
44.3%
Portfolio components
CMT - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Core Molding Technologies, Inc. reported a gross profit of 11.98M and revenue of 58.58M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 20.5%.

AMRX - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Amneal Pharmaceuticals, Inc. reported a gross profit of 320.11M and revenue of 722.52M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 44.3%.

CMT - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Core Molding Technologies, Inc. reported an operating income of 764.00K and revenue of 58.58M, resulting in an operating margin of 1.3%.

AMRX - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Amneal Pharmaceuticals, Inc. reported an operating income of 133.54M and revenue of 722.52M, resulting in an operating margin of 18.5%.

CMT - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Core Molding Technologies, Inc. reported a net income of 605.00K and revenue of 58.58M, resulting in a net margin of 1.0%.

AMRX - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Amneal Pharmaceuticals, Inc. reported a net income of 62.50M and revenue of 722.52M, resulting in a net margin of 8.7%.


Frequently Asked Questions


CMT and AMRX have a correlation of 0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CMT has higher volatility (12.71%) compared to AMRX (9.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CMT dropped -96.21% vs AMRX's -97.52%.

AMRX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.32 vs 1.13), 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 CMT and AMRX

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