CNQ vs. IMO

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNQ) and Imperial Oil Limited (IMO).

Performance

CNQ vs. IMO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNQ) and Imperial Oil Limited (IMO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

CNQ vs. IMO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CNQ Canadian Natural Resources Limited	38.80%	15.58%	-1.31%	23.72%	42.82%	83.55%	-19.06%	39.72%	-29.92%	15.97%
IMO Imperial Oil Limited	50.22%	43.85%	10.47%	20.89%	38.00%	95.29%	-25.37%	7.16%	-17.21%	-8.36%

Fundamentals

Market Cap CNQ : $97.27B IMO : $63.24B
EPS CNQ : $5.19 IMO : $6.51
PE Ratio CNQ : 8.98 IMO : 19.82
PEG Ratio CNQ : 0.43 IMO : 0.45
PS Ratio CNQ : 2.34 IMO : 1.42
PB Ratio CNQ : 2.19 IMO : 2.84
Total Revenue (TTM) CNQ : $41.50B IMO : $45.60B
Gross Profit (TTM) CNQ : $12.51B IMO : $6.60B
EBITDA (TTM) CNQ : $18.36B IMO : $6.84B

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNQ achieves a 38.80% return, which is significantly lower than IMO's 50.22% return. Over the past 10 years, CNQ has outperformed IMO with an annualized return of 19.72%, while IMO has yielded a comparatively lower 17.69% annualized return.

CNQ

• 1D: -4.45%
• 1M: 5.94%
• YTD: 38.80%
• 6M: 49.86%
• 1Y: 56.02%
• 3Y*: 24.72%
• 5Y*: 31.04%
• 10Y*: 19.72%

IMO

• 1D: -1.42%
• 1M: 9.12%
• YTD: 50.22%
• 6M: 44.84%
• 1Y: 81.22%
• 3Y*: 40.11%
• 5Y*: 42.26%
• 10Y*: 17.69%

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

Return for Risk

CNQ vs. IMO — Risk / Return Rank

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

CNQ

CNQ Risk / Return Rank: 85
CNQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
CNQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
CNQ Omega Ratio Rank: 82
CNQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
CNQ Martin Ratio Rank: 88

IMO

IMO Risk / Return Rank: 93
IMO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
IMO Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
IMO Omega Ratio Rank: 92
IMO Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
IMO Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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.

CNQ vs. IMO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNQ) and Imperial Oil Limited (IMO). 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.

	CNQ	IMO	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.79	2.78	-0.99
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.36	3.25	-0.89
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.44	-0.13
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.93	4.57	-1.64
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	9.33	13.70	-4.37
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CNQ vs. IMO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNQ Sharpe Ratio is 1.79, which is lower than the IMO Sharpe Ratio of 2.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNQ and IMO, 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

	CNQ	IMO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.79	2.78	-0.99
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.95	1.30	-0.35
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.49	0.50	-0.01
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.41	0.44	-0.03

Correlation

The correlation between CNQ and IMO is 0.69, 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

CNQ vs. IMO - Dividend Comparison

CNQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.74%, more than IMO's 1.71% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CNQ Canadian Natural Resources Limited	3.74%	5.01%	5.02%	4.17%	6.31%	3.78%	5.26%	3.49%	4.56%	3.08%	2.94%	4.21%
IMO Imperial Oil Limited	1.71%	2.40%	2.84%	2.73%	2.30%	2.28%	3.50%	2.41%	2.36%	2.02%	1.70%	1.66%

Drawdowns

CNQ vs. IMO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNQ drawdown since its inception was -80.75%, roughly equal to the maximum IMO drawdown of -84.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNQ and IMO.

Drawdown Indicators

	CNQ	IMO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-80.75%	-84.82%	+4.07%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-20.04%	-18.10%	-1.94%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.85%	-29.72%	-6.13%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-77.84%	-76.96%	-0.88%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.06%	-1.42%	-5.64%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-23.64%	-21.27%	-2.37%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.29%	6.03%	+0.26%

Volatility

CNQ vs. IMO - Volatility Comparison

Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNQ) has a higher volatility of 9.19% compared to Imperial Oil Limited (IMO) at 5.77%. This indicates that CNQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IMO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CNQ	IMO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.19%	5.77%	+3.42%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.23%	20.15%	+0.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	31.56%	29.42%	+2.14%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	32.70%	32.63%	+0.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	40.24%	35.47%	+4.77%

Financials

CNQ vs. IMO - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Canadian Natural Resources Limited and Imperial Oil Limited over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

CNQ - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Canadian Natural Resources Limited reported a gross profit of 2.04B and revenue of 9.60B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 21.2%.

IMO - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Imperial Oil Limited reported a gross profit of 1.92B and revenue of 11.27B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 17.0%.

CNQ - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Canadian Natural Resources Limited reported an operating income of 1.79B and revenue of 9.60B, resulting in an operating margin of 18.7%.

IMO - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Imperial Oil Limited reported an operating income of 624.49M and revenue of 11.27B, resulting in an operating margin of 5.5%.

CNQ - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Canadian Natural Resources Limited reported a net income of 5.30B and revenue of 9.60B, resulting in a net margin of 55.2%.

IMO - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Imperial Oil Limited reported a net income of 491.60M and revenue of 11.27B, resulting in a net margin of 4.4%.