CRUS vs. AMBA

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Cirrus Logic, Inc. (CRUS) and Ambarella, Inc. (AMBA).

Performance

CRUS vs. AMBA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Cirrus Logic, Inc. (CRUS) and Ambarella, Inc. (AMBA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

CRUS vs. AMBA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CRUS Cirrus Logic, Inc.	22.04%	19.00%	19.70%	11.69%	-19.06%	11.95%	-0.25%	148.37%	-36.02%	-8.28%
AMBA Ambarella, Inc.	-27.34%	-2.61%	18.68%	-25.47%	-59.47%	120.96%	51.62%	73.13%	-40.46%	8.54%

Fundamentals

Market Cap CRUS : $7.62B AMBA : $2.22B
EPS CRUS : $7.62 AMBA : -$1.78
PS Ratio CRUS : 3.89 AMBA : 5.61
PB Ratio CRUS : 3.54 AMBA : 3.74
Total Revenue (TTM) CRUS : $1.97B AMBA : $390.70M
Gross Profit (TTM) CRUS : $1.04B AMBA : $231.27M
EBITDA (TTM) CRUS : $521.26M AMBA : -$71.46M

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CRUS achieves a 22.04% return, which is significantly higher than AMBA's -27.34% return. Over the past 10 years, CRUS has outperformed AMBA with an annualized return of 14.56%, while AMBA has yielded a comparatively lower 1.48% annualized return.

CRUS

• 1D: 4.55%
• 1M: 2.48%
• YTD: 22.04%
• 6M: 15.43%
• 1Y: 45.12%
• 3Y*: 9.76%
• 5Y*: 10.54%
• 10Y*: 14.56%

AMBA

• 1D: 5.81%
• 1M: -14.69%
• YTD: -27.34%
• 6M: -37.62%
• 1Y: 2.27%
• 3Y*: -12.72%
• 5Y*: -13.33%
• 10Y*: 1.48%

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

Return for Risk

CRUS vs. AMBA — Risk / Return Rank

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

CRUS

CRUS Risk / Return Rank: 77
CRUS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
CRUS Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
CRUS Omega Ratio Rank: 74
CRUS Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
CRUS Martin Ratio Rank: 82

AMBA

AMBA Risk / Return Rank: 43
AMBA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
AMBA Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
AMBA Omega Ratio Rank: 44
AMBA Calmar Ratio Rank: 42
AMBA Martin Ratio Rank: 43

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.

CRUS vs. AMBA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cirrus Logic, Inc. (CRUS) and Ambarella, Inc. (AMBA). 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.

	CRUS	AMBA	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.14	0.03	+1.11
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.72	0.54	+1.18
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.08	+0.16
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.02	0.03	+1.99
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	6.47	0.08	+6.38
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CRUS vs. AMBA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CRUS Sharpe Ratio is 1.14, which is higher than the AMBA Sharpe Ratio of 0.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CRUS and AMBA, 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

	CRUS	AMBA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.14	0.03	+1.11
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.29	-0.22	+0.51
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.36	0.03	+0.34
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.10	0.30	-0.20

Correlation

The correlation between CRUS and AMBA 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

CRUS vs. AMBA - Dividend Comparison

Neither CRUS nor AMBA has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

CRUS vs. AMBA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CRUS drawdown since its inception was -97.48%, which is greater than AMBA's maximum drawdown of -81.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CRUS and AMBA.

Drawdown Indicators

	CRUS	AMBA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-97.48%	-81.65%	-15.83%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-22.44%	-49.06%	+26.62%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-46.85%	-81.65%	+34.80%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-55.94%	-81.65%	+25.71%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.74%	-76.26%	+73.52%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-53.00%	-48.11%	-4.89%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.01%	20.25%	-13.24%

Volatility

CRUS vs. AMBA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Cirrus Logic, Inc. (CRUS) is 11.50%, while Ambarella, Inc. (AMBA) has a volatility of 13.61%. This indicates that CRUS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AMBA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CRUS	AMBA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.50%	13.61%	-2.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	25.11%	46.82%	-21.71%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	39.67%	67.07%	-27.40%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	36.12%	61.74%	-25.62%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	40.29%	56.05%	-15.76%

Financials

CRUS vs. AMBA - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Cirrus Logic, Inc. and Ambarella, Inc. over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

CRUS - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Cirrus Logic, Inc. reported a gross profit of 308.13M and revenue of 580.62M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 53.1%.

AMBA - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Ambarella, Inc. reported a gross profit of 58.16M and revenue of 100.87M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 57.7%.

CRUS - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Cirrus Logic, Inc. reported an operating income of 152.93M and revenue of 580.62M, resulting in an operating margin of 26.3%.

AMBA - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Ambarella, Inc. reported an operating income of -19.65M and revenue of 100.87M, resulting in an operating margin of -19.5%.

CRUS - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Cirrus Logic, Inc. reported a net income of 140.31M and revenue of 580.62M, resulting in a net margin of 24.2%.

AMBA - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Ambarella, Inc. reported a net income of -16.44M and revenue of 100.87M, resulting in a net margin of -16.3%.