CNL vs. GFI

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Collective Mining Ltd (CNL) and Gold Fields Limited (GFI).

Performance

CNL vs. GFI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Collective Mining Ltd (CNL) and Gold Fields Limited (GFI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

CNL vs. GFI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CNL Collective Mining Ltd	26.53%	250.72%	56.98%
GFI Gold Fields Limited	13.45%	240.42%	-19.32%

Fundamentals

EPS CNL : -$0.91 GFI : $5.39
Total Revenue (TTM) CNL : $0.00 GFI : $13.98B
Gross Profit (TTM) CNL : -$97.50K GFI : $7.34B
EBITDA (TTM) CNL : -$48.35M GFI : $8.04B

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNL achieves a 26.53% return, which is significantly higher than GFI's 13.45% return.

CNL

• 1D: 4.83%
• 1M: -9.20%
• YTD: 26.53%
• 6M: 25.15%
• 1Y: 112.18%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GFI

• 1D: 6.01%
• 1M: -14.48%
• YTD: 13.45%
• 6M: 18.67%
• 1Y: 119.94%
• 3Y*: 58.55%
• 5Y*: 41.26%
• 10Y*: 31.70%

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

Return for Risk

CNL vs. GFI — Risk / Return Rank

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

CNL

CNL Risk / Return Rank: 82
CNL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
CNL Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
CNL Omega Ratio Rank: 76
CNL Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
CNL Martin Ratio Rank: 83

GFI

GFI Risk / Return Rank: 87
GFI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
GFI Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
GFI Omega Ratio Rank: 83
GFI Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
GFI Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

CNL vs. GFI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Collective Mining Ltd (CNL) and Gold Fields Limited (GFI). 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.

	CNL	GFI	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.63	1.98	-0.35
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.18	2.31	-0.13
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.32	-0.05
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.38	3.66	-0.28
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	7.29	11.55	-4.26
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CNL vs. GFI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNL Sharpe Ratio is 1.63, which is comparable to the GFI Sharpe Ratio of 1.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNL and GFI, 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

	CNL	GFI	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.63	1.98	-0.35
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.80	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.57	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	3.35	0.15	+3.19

Correlation

The correlation between CNL and GFI is 0.45, 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

CNL vs. GFI - Dividend Comparison

CNL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GFI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.83%.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CNL Collective Mining Ltd	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
GFI Gold Fields Limited	3.83%	1.77%	2.94%	2.87%	3.40%	3.24%	1.72%	0.81%	1.61%	1.41%	1.35%	0.60%

Drawdowns

CNL vs. GFI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNL drawdown since its inception was -33.29%, smaller than the maximum GFI drawdown of -88.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNL and GFI.

Drawdown Indicators

	CNL	GFI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.29%	-88.05%	+54.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-33.29%	-34.63%	+1.34%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-56.22%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-63.09%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.08%	-19.47%	+8.39%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.17%	-44.43%	+35.26%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	15.42%	10.97%	+4.45%

Volatility

CNL vs. GFI - Volatility Comparison

Collective Mining Ltd (CNL) has a higher volatility of 27.00% compared to Gold Fields Limited (GFI) at 19.95%. This indicates that CNL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GFI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CNL	GFI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	27.00%	19.95%	+7.05%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	54.39%	48.31%	+6.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	69.14%	61.00%	+8.14%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	64.90%	51.62%	+13.28%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	64.90%	55.33%	+9.57%

Financials