GIS vs. FANG
GIS (General Mills, Inc.) and FANG (Diamondback Energy, Inc.) are both stocks. GIS operates in Packaged Foods (Consumer Defensive), while FANG operates in Oil & Gas E&P (Energy). Over the past 10 years, GIS returned -3.08%/yr vs 11.24%/yr for FANG. At a 0.07 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
GIS vs. FANG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GIS achieves a -26.51% return, which is significantly lower than FANG's 33.36% return. Over the past 10 years, GIS has underperformed FANG with an annualized return of -3.08%, while FANG has yielded a comparatively higher 11.24% annualized return.
GIS
- 1D
- -0.03%
- 1M
- -4.44%
- YTD
- -26.51%
- 6M
- -25.64%
- 1Y
- -36.06%
- 3Y*
- -22.93%
- 5Y*
- -8.46%
- 10Y*
- -3.08%
FANG
- 1D
- 2.89%
- 1M
- 5.61%
- YTD
- 33.36%
- 6M
- 27.27%
- 1Y
- 44.64%
- 3Y*
- 18.70%
- 5Y*
- 22.65%
- 10Y*
- 11.24%
GIS vs. FANG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GIS General Mills, Inc. | -26.51% | -23.75% | 1.45% | -19.97% | 28.09% | 18.53% | 13.60% | 43.13% | -31.57% | -0.65% |
FANG Diamondback Energy, Inc. | 33.36% | -5.64% | 10.35% | 19.66% | 35.34% | 127.51% | -46.00% | 0.92% | -26.35% | 24.93% |
Correlation
The correlation between GIS and FANG is 0.01, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.01 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.04 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.05 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.03 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 15, 2012 | 0.07 |
Fundamentals
GIS:
$17.98B
FANG:
$56.05B
GIS:
$4.08
FANG:
$1.40
GIS:
8.12
FANG:
141.45
GIS:
0.98
FANG:
3.75
GIS:
1.92
FANG:
1.54
GIS:
$18.37B
FANG:
$15.19B
GIS:
$4.70B
FANG:
$7.30B
GIS:
$3.03B
FANG:
$5.54B
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
GIS vs. FANG — Risk / Return Rank
GIS
FANG
GIS vs. FANG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for General Mills, Inc. (GIS) and Diamondback Energy, Inc. (FANG). 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.
| GIS | FANG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.95 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -4.21 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.74 | 1.24 | -0.49 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.95 | 3.58 | -4.53 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.94 | 7.07 | -9.01 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GIS | FANG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -1.52 | 1.43 | -2.95 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.40 | 0.60 | -1.00 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.14 | 0.23 | -0.37 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.42 | 0.47 | -0.05 |
Drawdowns
GIS vs. FANG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GIS drawdown since its inception was -59.63%, smaller than the maximum FANG drawdown of -88.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GIS and FANG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GIS | FANG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -59.63% | -88.72% | +29.09% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -37.97% | -12.53% | -25.44% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -55.56% | -42.10% | -13.46% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -59.63% | -42.10% | -17.53% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -59.63% | -88.72% | +29.09% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -58.42% | -6.74% | -51.68% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.27% | -19.39% | +9.12% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 18.63% | 6.33% | +12.30% |
Volatility
GIS vs. FANG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for General Mills, Inc. (GIS) is 6.96%, while Diamondback Energy, Inc. (FANG) has a volatility of 11.35%. This indicates that GIS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FANG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GIS | FANG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.96% | 11.35% | -4.39% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 18.58% | 23.88% | -5.30% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.84% | 31.51% | -7.67% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.13% | 37.98% | -16.85% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.09% | 49.06% | -26.97% |
Dividends
GIS vs. FANG - Dividend Comparison
GIS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.36%, more than FANG's 2.09% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FANG Diamondback Energy, Inc. | 2.09% | 2.66% | 5.06% | 5.15% | 6.55% | 1.62% | 3.10% | 0.74% | 0.40% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
GIS General Mills, Inc. | 7.36% | 5.20% | 3.73% | 3.47% | 2.50% | 3.03% | 3.37% | 3.66% | 5.03% | 3.27% | 3.01% | 3.00% |
Financials
GIS vs. FANG - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between General Mills, Inc. and Diamondback Energy, 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
GIS vs. FANG - Profitability Comparison
GIS - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, General Mills, Inc. reported a gross profit of 0.00 and revenue of 4.44B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 0.0%.
FANG - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Diamondback Energy, Inc. reported a gross profit of 3.85B and revenue of 4.24B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 90.9%.
GIS - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, General Mills, Inc. reported an operating income of 524.60M and revenue of 4.44B, resulting in an operating margin of 11.8%.
FANG - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Diamondback Energy, Inc. reported an operating income of 30.00M and revenue of 4.24B, resulting in an operating margin of 0.7%.
GIS - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, General Mills, Inc. reported a net income of 303.10M and revenue of 4.44B, resulting in a net margin of 6.8%.
FANG - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Diamondback Energy, Inc. reported a net income of 144.00M and revenue of 4.24B, resulting in a net margin of 3.4%.
Frequently Asked Questions
GIS and FANG have a correlation of 0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FANG has higher volatility (11.35%) compared to GIS (6.96%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GIS dropped -59.63% vs FANG's -88.72%.
FANG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.43 vs -1.52), 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 GIS and FANG
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