GRG.L vs. CWK.L
GRG.L (Greggs plc) and CWK.L (Cranswick plc) are both stocks. Both are in the Consumer Defensive sector — GRG.L in Grocery Stores, CWK.L in Packaged Foods. Over the past 10 years, GRG.L returned 7.55%/yr vs 10.90%/yr for CWK.L. At a 0.14 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
GRG.L vs. CWK.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GRG.L achieves a 3.44% return, which is significantly lower than CWK.L's 9.18% return. Over the past 10 years, GRG.L has underperformed CWK.L with an annualized return of 7.55%, while CWK.L has yielded a comparatively higher 10.90% annualized return.
GRG.L
- 1D
- 0.78%
- 1M
- 11.24%
- YTD
- 3.44%
- 6M
- 3.81%
- 1Y
- -10.82%
- 3Y*
- -11.53%
- 5Y*
- -4.96%
- 10Y*
- 7.55%
CWK.L
- 1D
- -1.81%
- 1M
- 1.12%
- YTD
- 9.18%
- 6M
- 6.85%
- 1Y
- 2.96%
- 3Y*
- 20.78%
- 5Y*
- 8.09%
- 10Y*
- 10.90%
GRG.L vs. CWK.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GRG.L Greggs plc | 3.44% | -37.28% | 11.16% | 13.40% | -26.55% | 87.35% | -20.60% | 88.25% | -6.96% | 48.41% |
CWK.L Cranswick plc | 9.18% | 3.90% | 30.30% | 26.64% | -14.83% | 7.15% | 5.64% | 31.57% | -19.75% | 44.71% |
Correlation
The correlation between GRG.L and CWK.L is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.31 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.33 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.33 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.28 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 4, 1988 | 0.14 |
The correlation between GRG.L and CWK.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.14 (all time) to 0.33 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Fundamentals
GRG.L:
£1.72B
CWK.L:
£2.97B
GRG.L:
£2.69
CWK.L:
£5.36
GRG.L:
6.26
CWK.L:
10.09
GRG.L:
3.28
CWK.L:
0.91
GRG.L:
0.41
CWK.L:
0.52
GRG.L:
2.76
CWK.L:
2.72
GRG.L:
£4.17B
CWK.L:
£5.71B
GRG.L:
£2.57B
CWK.L:
£891.40M
GRG.L:
£626.30M
CWK.L:
£617.20M
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
GRG.L vs. CWK.L — Risk / Return Rank
GRG.L
CWK.L
GRG.L vs. CWK.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Greggs plc (GRG.L) and Cranswick plc (CWK.L). 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.
| GRG.L | CWK.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.64 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.88 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.94 | 1.05 | -0.11 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.52 | 0.36 | -0.88 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.85 | 0.76 | -1.62 |
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
| GRG.L | CWK.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.44 | 0.20 | -0.64 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.16 | 0.39 | -0.55 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.23 | 0.46 | -0.23 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.63 | 0.64 | -0.01 |
Drawdowns
GRG.L vs. CWK.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GRG.L drawdown since its inception was -53.77%, which is greater than CWK.L's maximum drawdown of -50.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GRG.L and CWK.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GRG.L | CWK.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.77% | -50.39% | -3.38% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -27.81% | -9.70% | -18.11% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -53.77% | -10.61% | -43.16% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -53.77% | -36.21% | -17.56% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -53.77% | -36.21% | -17.56% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -43.34% | -2.70% | -40.64% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -13.31% | -11.04% | -2.27% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 16.99% | 4.63% | +12.36% |
Volatility
GRG.L vs. CWK.L - Volatility Comparison
Greggs plc (GRG.L) has a higher volatility of 10.43% compared to Cranswick plc (CWK.L) at 8.18%. This indicates that GRG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CWK.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GRG.L | CWK.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.43% | 8.18% | +2.25% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 21.02% | 13.82% | +7.20% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 32.80% | 17.57% | +15.23% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 30.56% | 20.70% | +9.86% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 33.28% | 23.65% | +9.63% |
Dividends
GRG.L vs. CWK.L - Dividend Comparison
GRG.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.10%, more than CWK.L's 1.90% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CWK.L Cranswick plc | 1.90% | 2.08% | 1.90% | 2.14% | 2.48% | 1.93% | 1.77% | 1.67% | 2.07% | 1.38% | 1.66% | 1.82% |
GRG.L Greggs plc | 4.10% | 4.11% | 3.77% | 2.31% | 4.13% | 0.45% | 1.84% | 3.13% | 2.58% | 2.27% | 5.23% | 3.30% |
Financials
GRG.L vs. CWK.L - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Greggs plc and Cranswick plc. 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
GRG.L vs. CWK.L - Profitability Comparison
GRG.L - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Greggs plc reported a gross profit of 690.40M and revenue of 1.12B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 61.5%.
CWK.L - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Cranswick plc reported a gross profit of 243.70M and revenue of 1.51B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 16.1%.
GRG.L - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Greggs plc reported an operating income of 113.30M and revenue of 1.12B, resulting in an operating margin of 10.1%.
CWK.L - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Cranswick plc reported an operating income of 123.00M and revenue of 1.51B, resulting in an operating margin of 8.1%.
GRG.L - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Greggs plc reported a net income of 75.70M and revenue of 1.12B, resulting in a net margin of 6.7%.
CWK.L - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Cranswick plc reported a net income of 78.00M and revenue of 1.51B, resulting in a net margin of 5.2%.
Frequently Asked Questions
GRG.L and CWK.L have a correlation of 0.31, 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 GRG.L and CWK.L
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