FRT vs. CWT
FRT (Federal Realty Investment Trust) and CWT (California Water Service Group) are both stocks. FRT operates in REIT - Retail (Real Estate), while CWT operates in Utilities - Regulated Water (Utilities). Over the past 10 years, FRT returned 0.64%/yr vs 6.11%/yr for CWT. At a 0.29 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
FRT vs. CWT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FRT achieves a 23.78% return, which is significantly higher than CWT's 16.49% return. Over the past 10 years, FRT has underperformed CWT with an annualized return of 0.64%, while CWT has yielded a comparatively higher 6.11% annualized return.
FRT
- 1D
- 0.17%
- 1M
- -2.13%
- 6M
- 21.38%
- YTD
- 23.78%
- 1Y
- 32.98%
- 3Y*
- 11.30%
- 5Y*
- 4.79%
- 10Y*
- 0.64%
CWT
- 1D
- 1.22%
- 1M
- 9.61%
- 6M
- 15.74%
- YTD
- 16.49%
- 1Y
- 11.40%
- 3Y*
- 2.28%
- 5Y*
- -0.91%
- 10Y*
- 6.11%
FRT vs. CWT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FRT Federal Realty Investment Trust | 23.78% | -5.91% | 12.07% | 6.55% | -22.66% | 65.97% | -30.66% | 12.51% | -8.10% | -3.59% |
CWT California Water Service Group | 16.49% | -1.81% | -10.64% | -12.83% | -14.13% | 35.05% | 6.68% | 9.85% | 7.06% | 36.39% |
Correlation
The correlation between FRT and CWT 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 | 0.40 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.42 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.40 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 26, 1990 | 0.29 |
The correlation between FRT and CWT shifts across timeframes, from 0.29 (all time) to 0.42 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Fundamentals
FRT:
$10.45B
CWT:
$2.98B
FRT:
$5.87
CWT:
$1.99
FRT:
20.59
CWT:
24.96
FRT:
1.25
CWT:
0.60
FRT:
7.95
CWT:
2.94
FRT:
3.33
CWT:
1.66
FRT:
$1.31B
CWT:
$1.01B
FRT:
$703.03M
CWT:
$366.63M
FRT:
$1.09B
CWT:
$329.51M
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
FRT vs. CWT — Risk / Return Rank
FRT
CWT
FRT vs. CWT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Federal Realty Investment Trust (FRT) and California Water Service Group (CWT). 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.
| FRT | CWT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.51 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.08 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.33 | 1.09 | +0.23 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.81 | 0.72 | +4.09 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.08 | 1.36 | +10.72 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FRT vs. CWT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FRT drawdown since its inception was -57.42%, which is greater than CWT's maximum drawdown of -38.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FRT and CWT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FRT | CWT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -57.42% | -38.21% | -19.21% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.96% | -14.59% | +7.63% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -27.38% | -24.13% | -3.25% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -34.99% | -38.21% | +3.22% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -56.47% | -38.21% | -18.26% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.01% | -23.50% | +20.49% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.76% | -11.73% | -0.03% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.77% | 7.72% | -4.95% |
Volatility
FRT vs. CWT - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Federal Realty Investment Trust (FRT) is 5.09%, while California Water Service Group (CWT) has a volatility of 6.02%. This indicates that FRT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CWT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FRT | CWT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.09% | 6.02% | -0.93% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.30% | 19.12% | -6.82% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.29% | 24.38% | -7.09% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 23.27% | 24.29% | -1.02% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 29.46% | 27.69% | +1.77% |
Dividends
FRT vs. CWT - Dividend Comparison
FRT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.74%, more than CWT's 2.55% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CWT California Water Service Group | 2.55% | 2.86% | 2.47% | 2.01% | 1.65% | 1.28% | 1.57% | 1.53% | 1.57% | 1.59% | 2.04% | 2.88% |
FRT Federal Realty Investment Trust | 3.74% | 4.39% | 2.93% | 4.21% | 4.26% | 3.12% | 4.96% | 3.22% | 3.42% | 2.98% | 2.70% | 2.48% |
Financials
FRT vs. CWT - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Federal Realty Investment Trust and California Water Service Group. 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
FRT vs. CWT - Profitability Comparison
FRT - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, Federal Realty Investment Trust reported a gross profit of 241.87M and revenue of 341.08M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 70.9%.
CWT - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 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%.
FRT - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, Federal Realty Investment Trust reported an operating income of 116.27M and revenue of 341.08M, resulting in an operating margin of 34.1%.
CWT - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 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%.
FRT - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, Federal Realty Investment Trust reported a net income of 159.10M and revenue of 341.08M, resulting in a net margin of 46.7%.
CWT - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 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%.
Frequently Asked Questions
FRT and CWT 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.
CWT has higher volatility (6.02%) compared to FRT (5.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FRT dropped -57.42% vs CWT's -38.21%.
FRT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.94 vs 0.43), 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.
Find the right allocation for FRT and CWT
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