EFR.TO vs. LUG.TO
EFR.TO (Energy Fuels Inc.) and LUG.TO (Lundin Gold Inc.) are both stocks. EFR.TO operates in Uranium (Energy), while LUG.TO operates in Gold (Basic Materials). Over the past 10 years, EFR.TO returned 21.00%/yr vs 32.69%/yr for LUG.TO. At a 0.12 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
EFR.TO vs. LUG.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EFR.TO achieves a 5.89% return, which is significantly higher than LUG.TO's -26.40% return. Over the past 10 years, EFR.TO has underperformed LUG.TO with an annualized return of 21.00%, while LUG.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 32.69% annualized return.
EFR.TO
- 1D
- -0.14%
- 1M
- -24.06%
- YTD
- 5.89%
- 6M
- 4.83%
- 1Y
- 187.96%
- 3Y*
- 34.35%
- 5Y*
- 19.77%
- 10Y*
- 21.00%
LUG.TO
- 1D
- 1.08%
- 1M
- -14.30%
- YTD
- -26.40%
- 6M
- -24.67%
- 1Y
- 17.51%
- 3Y*
- 79.74%
- 5Y*
- 53.19%
- 10Y*
- 32.69%
EFR.TO vs. LUG.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EFR.TO Energy Fuels Inc. | 5.89% | 169.01% | -22.21% | 13.37% | -13.25% | 78.89% | 117.74% | -35.92% | 71.24% | 2.26% |
LUG.TO Lundin Gold Inc. | -26.40% | 291.22% | 91.60% | 29.55% | 30.60% | -4.67% | 31.21% | 66.93% | 10.15% | -13.88% |
Correlation
The correlation between EFR.TO and LUG.TO is 0.28, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.28 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.21 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.24 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.18 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 12, 2006 | 0.12 |
The correlation between EFR.TO and LUG.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.12 (all time) to 0.28 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Fundamentals
EFR.TO:
CA$5.08B
LUG.TO:
CA$18.65B
EFR.TO:
-$0.30
LUG.TO:
$3.77
EFR.TO:
41.45
LUG.TO:
6.66
EFR.TO:
5.03
LUG.TO:
9.79
EFR.TO:
$84.86M
LUG.TO:
$2.00B
EFR.TO:
$25.23M
LUG.TO:
$1.41B
EFR.TO:
-$72.89M
LUG.TO:
$1.43B
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
EFR.TO vs. LUG.TO — Risk / Return Rank
EFR.TO
LUG.TO
EFR.TO vs. LUG.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Energy Fuels Inc. (EFR.TO) and Lundin Gold Inc. (LUG.TO). 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.
| EFR.TO | LUG.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.62 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.76 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.10 | +0.20 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.70 | 0.46 | +3.24 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.20 | 1.23 | +5.96 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EFR.TO vs. LUG.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EFR.TO drawdown since its inception was -99.57%, which is greater than LUG.TO's maximum drawdown of -94.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EFR.TO and LUG.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EFR.TO | LUG.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -99.57% | -94.74% | -4.83% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -51.09% | -37.89% | -13.20% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -59.28% | -37.89% | -21.39% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -64.59% | -38.94% | -25.65% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -78.32% | -41.84% | -36.48% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -92.13% | -34.73% | -57.40% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -91.43% | -67.67% | -23.76% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 26.24% | 14.24% | +12.00% |
Volatility
EFR.TO vs. LUG.TO - Volatility Comparison
Energy Fuels Inc. (EFR.TO) has a higher volatility of 29.13% compared to Lundin Gold Inc. (LUG.TO) at 17.86%. This indicates that EFR.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LUG.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EFR.TO | LUG.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 29.13% | 17.86% | +11.27% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 66.37% | 42.07% | +24.30% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 97.73% | 55.97% | +41.76% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 71.77% | 46.54% | +25.23% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 70.81% | 43.40% | +27.41% |
Dividends
EFR.TO vs. LUG.TO - Dividend Comparison
EFR.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while LUG.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.79%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EFR.TO Energy Fuels Inc. | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
LUG.TO Lundin Gold Inc. | 6.79% | 3.35% | 2.69% | 3.26% | 1.97% |
Financials
EFR.TO vs. LUG.TO - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Energy Fuels Inc. and Lundin Gold 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.
Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities
EFR.TO vs. LUG.TO - Profitability Comparison
EFR.TO - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Energy Fuels Inc. reported a gross profit of 14.36M and revenue of 35.84M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 40.1%.
LUG.TO - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Lundin Gold Inc. reported a gross profit of 420.70M and revenue of 567.38M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 74.2%.
EFR.TO - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Energy Fuels Inc. reported an operating income of -14.55M and revenue of 35.84M, resulting in an operating margin of -40.6%.
LUG.TO - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Lundin Gold Inc. reported an operating income of 391.03M and revenue of 567.38M, resulting in an operating margin of 68.9%.
EFR.TO - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Energy Fuels Inc. reported a net income of -10.84M and revenue of 35.84M, resulting in a net margin of -30.3%.
LUG.TO - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Lundin Gold Inc. reported a net income of 273.33M and revenue of 567.38M, resulting in a net margin of 48.2%.
Frequently Asked Questions
EFR.TO and LUG.TO have a correlation of 0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
Find the right allocation for EFR.TO and LUG.TO
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