PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CWT vs. GWRS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends
Financials

Performance

CWT vs. GWRS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in California Water Service Group (CWT) and Global Water Resources, Inc. (GWRS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CWT achieves a 5.92% return, which is significantly higher than GWRS's -16.74% return. Over the past 10 years, CWT has outperformed GWRS with an annualized return of 5.12%, while GWRS has yielded a comparatively lower 1.08% annualized return.


CWT

1D
0.00%
1M
2.84%
YTD
5.92%
6M
6.05%
1Y
0.09%
3Y*
-1.05%
5Y*
-2.01%
10Y*
5.12%

GWRS

1D
-2.68%
1M
-4.09%
YTD
-16.74%
6M
-17.42%
1Y
-30.90%
3Y*
-16.60%
5Y*
-13.70%
10Y*
1.08%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CWT vs. GWRS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CWT
California Water Service Group
5.92%-1.81%-10.64%-12.83%-14.13%35.05%6.68%9.85%7.06%36.39%
GWRS
Global Water Resources, Inc.
-16.74%-24.33%-9.94%0.95%-20.68%20.65%12.34%33.21%11.84%5.74%

Correlation

The correlation between CWT and GWRS is 0.34, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.34

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

0.33

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

0.30

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

0.30

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 28, 2016

0.30

Fundamentals

Market Cap

CWT:

$2.70B

GWRS:

$198.43M

EPS

CWT:

$1.99

GWRS:

$0.07

PE Ratio

CWT:

22.68

GWRS:

95.61

PEG Ratio

CWT:

0.55

GWRS:

63.10

PS Ratio

CWT:

2.67

GWRS:

3.38

PB Ratio

CWT:

1.51

GWRS:

2.36

Total Revenue (TTM)

CWT:

$1.01B

GWRS:

$56.59M

Gross Profit (TTM)

CWT:

$366.63M

GWRS:

$16.24M

EBITDA (TTM)

CWT:

$329.51M

GWRS:

$19.29M

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

CWT vs. GWRS — Risk / Return Rank

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

CWT
CWT Risk / Return Rank: 3939
Overall Rank
CWT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CWT Sortino Ratio Rank: 3535
Sortino Ratio Rank
CWT Omega Ratio Rank: 3535
Omega Ratio Rank
CWT Calmar Ratio Rank: 4242
Calmar Ratio Rank
CWT Martin Ratio Rank: 4242
Martin Ratio Rank

GWRS
GWRS Risk / Return Rank: 99
Overall Rank
GWRS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GWRS Sortino Ratio Rank: 1010
Sortino Ratio Rank
GWRS Omega Ratio Rank: 99
Omega Ratio Rank
GWRS Calmar Ratio Rank: 1111
Calmar Ratio Rank
GWRS Martin Ratio Rank: 77
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.

CWT vs. GWRS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for California Water Service Group (CWT) and Global Water Resources, Inc. (GWRS). 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.


CWTGWRSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.91

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.31

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.02

0.85

+0.17

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.01

-0.81

+0.82

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.01

-1.46

+1.47

CWT vs. GWRS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CWT Sharpe Ratio is 0.00, which is higher than the GWRS Sharpe Ratio of -0.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CWT and GWRS, 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...

Drawdowns

CWT vs. GWRS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CWT drawdown since its inception was -38.21%, smaller than the maximum GWRS drawdown of -63.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CWT and GWRS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CWTGWRSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-38.21%

-63.38%

+25.17%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.59%

-38.17%

+23.58%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.13%

-48.36%

+24.23%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-38.21%

-63.38%

+25.17%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-38.21%

-63.38%

+25.17%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-30.44%

-61.79%

+31.35%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-11.71%

-22.10%

+10.39%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.80%

21.25%

-13.45%

Volatility

CWT vs. GWRS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for California Water Service Group (CWT) is 7.33%, while Global Water Resources, Inc. (GWRS) has a volatility of 12.45%. This indicates that CWT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GWRS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CWTGWRSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.33%

12.45%

-5.12%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

18.64%

25.93%

-7.29%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

24.24%

34.28%

-10.04%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.24%

32.15%

-7.91%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

27.74%

33.60%

-5.86%

Dividends

CWT vs. GWRS - Dividend Comparison

CWT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.81%, less than GWRS's 4.40% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CWT
California Water Service Group
2.81%2.86%2.47%2.01%1.65%1.28%1.57%1.53%1.57%1.59%2.04%2.88%
GWRS
Global Water Resources, Inc.
4.40%3.60%2.62%2.28%2.22%1.71%2.01%2.18%2.81%2.94%1.90%0.00%

Financials

CWT vs. GWRS - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between California Water Service Group and Global Water Resources, 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


0.0050.00M100.00M150.00M200.00M250.00M300.00M350.00M20222023202420252026
214.57M
13.29M
(CWT) Total Revenue
(GWRS) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

CWT vs. GWRS - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between California Water Service Group and Global Water Resources, Inc. over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

Gross Margin
Operating Margin
Net Margin
Quarterly
Annual

-20.0%0.0%20.0%40.0%60.0%80.0%2022202320242025202600
Portfolio components
CWT - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, California Water Service Group reported a gross profit of 0.00 and revenue of 214.57M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 0.0%.

GWRS - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Global Water Resources, Inc. reported a gross profit of 0.00 and revenue of 13.29M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 0.0%.

CWT - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, California Water Service Group reported an operating income of 18.16M and revenue of 214.57M, resulting in an operating margin of 8.5%.

GWRS - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Global Water Resources, Inc. reported an operating income of 389.00K and revenue of 13.29M, resulting in an operating margin of 2.9%.

CWT - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, California Water Service Group reported a net income of 4.04M and revenue of 214.57M, resulting in a net margin of 1.9%.

GWRS - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Global Water Resources, Inc. reported a net income of -366.00K and revenue of 13.29M, resulting in a net margin of -2.8%.


Frequently Asked Questions


CWT and GWRS have a correlation of 0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GWRS has higher volatility (12.45%) compared to CWT (7.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CWT dropped -38.21% vs GWRS's -63.38%.

CWT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.00 vs -0.91), 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 CWT and GWRS

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