PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GIS vs. LNG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends
Financials

Performance

GIS vs. LNG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in General Mills, Inc. (GIS) and Cheniere Energy, Inc. (LNG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GIS achieves a -23.47% return, which is significantly lower than LNG's 24.74% return. Over the past 10 years, GIS has underperformed LNG with an annualized return of -2.63%, while LNG has yielded a comparatively higher 22.78% annualized return.


GIS

1D
2.04%
1M
2.68%
YTD
-23.47%
6M
-23.78%
1Y
-33.38%
3Y*
-21.38%
5Y*
-7.83%
10Y*
-2.63%

LNG

1D
0.47%
1M
0.79%
YTD
24.74%
6M
28.05%
1Y
3.66%
3Y*
19.57%
5Y*
23.34%
10Y*
22.78%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GIS vs. LNG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
GIS
General Mills, Inc.
-23.47%-23.75%1.45%-19.97%28.09%18.53%13.60%43.13%-31.57%-0.65%
LNG
Cheniere Energy, Inc.
24.74%-8.70%27.18%15.02%49.30%69.48%-1.70%3.18%9.94%29.95%

Correlation

The correlation between GIS and LNG is 0.04, 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

0.04

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

0.03

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

0.04

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

0.06

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 11, 1997

0.08

Fundamentals

Market Cap

GIS:

$18.72B

LNG:

$50.79B

EPS

GIS:

$4.08

LNG:

$6.80

PE Ratio

GIS:

8.45

LNG:

35.48

PEG Ratio

GIS:

3.64

LNG:

0.19

PS Ratio

GIS:

1.02

LNG:

2.58

PB Ratio

GIS:

2.00

LNG:

13.53

Total Revenue (TTM)

GIS:

$18.37B

LNG:

$20.28B

Gross Profit (TTM)

GIS:

$4.70B

LNG:

$5.52B

EBITDA (TTM)

GIS:

$3.03B

LNG:

$5.81B

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. LNG — Risk / Return Rank

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

GIS
GIS Risk / Return Rank: 33
Overall Rank
GIS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GIS Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
Sortino Ratio Rank
GIS Omega Ratio Rank: 44
Omega Ratio Rank
GIS Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
Calmar Ratio Rank
GIS Martin Ratio Rank: 22
Martin Ratio Rank

LNG
LNG Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
LNG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LNG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4141
Sortino Ratio Rank
LNG Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
LNG Calmar Ratio Rank: 4747
Calmar Ratio Rank
LNG Martin Ratio Rank: 4646
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.

GIS vs. LNG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for General Mills, Inc. (GIS) and Cheniere Energy, Inc. (LNG). 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.


GISLNGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.53

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.41

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.77

1.05

-0.28

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.91

0.15

-1.06

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-1.86

0.31

-2.17

GIS vs. LNG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GIS Sharpe Ratio is -1.40, which is lower than the LNG Sharpe Ratio of 0.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GIS and LNG, 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

GIS vs. LNG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GIS drawdown since its inception was -59.63%, smaller than the maximum LNG drawdown of -97.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GIS and LNG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GISLNGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-59.63%

-97.84%

+38.21%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-36.85%

-24.09%

-12.76%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-55.32%

-24.87%

-30.45%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-59.63%

-24.87%

-34.76%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-59.63%

-57.53%

-2.10%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-56.70%

-18.55%

-38.15%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.28%

-43.14%

+32.86%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

19.06%

11.88%

+7.18%

Volatility

GIS vs. LNG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for General Mills, Inc. (GIS) is 6.25%, while Cheniere Energy, Inc. (LNG) has a volatility of 7.19%. This indicates that GIS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LNG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GISLNGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.25%

7.19%

-0.94%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

18.81%

21.49%

-2.68%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

23.96%

27.02%

-3.06%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.14%

30.27%

-9.13%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.10%

32.50%

-10.40%

Dividends

GIS vs. LNG - Dividend Comparison

GIS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.07%, more than LNG's 0.90% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
GIS
General Mills, Inc.
7.07%5.20%3.73%3.47%2.50%3.03%3.37%3.66%5.03%3.27%3.01%3.00%
LNG
Cheniere Energy, Inc.
0.90%1.06%0.84%0.95%0.92%0.33%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Financials

GIS vs. LNG - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between General Mills, Inc. and Cheniere 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.


Quarterly
Annual

Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities


3.00B4.00B5.00B6.00B7.00B8.00B9.00BJulyOctober2022AprilJulyOctober2023AprilJulyOctober2024AprilJulyOctober2025AprilJulyOctober2026
4.44B
5.87B
(GIS) Total Revenue
(LNG) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

GIS vs. LNG - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between General Mills, Inc. and Cheniere Energy, Inc. over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

Gross Margin
Operating Margin
Net Margin
Quarterly
Annual

0.0%10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%50.0%60.0%70.0%JulyOctober2022AprilJulyOctober2023AprilJulyOctober2024AprilJulyOctober2025AprilJulyOctober202600
Portfolio components
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%.

LNG - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Cheniere Energy, Inc. reported a gross profit of 0.00 and revenue of 5.87B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 0.0%.

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%.

LNG - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Cheniere Energy, Inc. reported an operating income of -3.49B and revenue of 5.87B, resulting in an operating margin of -59.4%.

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%.

LNG - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Cheniere Energy, Inc. reported a net income of -3.50B and revenue of 5.87B, resulting in a net margin of -59.7%.


Frequently Asked Questions


GIS and LNG have a correlation of 0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LNG has higher volatility (7.19%) compared to GIS (6.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GIS dropped -59.63% vs LNG's -97.84%.

LNG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.14 vs -1.40), 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 GIS and LNG

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