PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GWH vs. CLX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends
Financials

Performance

GWH vs. CLX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ESS Tech, Inc. (GWH) and The Clorox Company (CLX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GWH achieves a -51.06% return, which is significantly lower than CLX's -10.11% return.


GWH

1D
-6.12%
1M
-17.12%
YTD
-51.06%
6M
-59.47%
1Y
-30.83%
3Y*
-63.49%
5Y*
-63.81%
10Y*

CLX

1D
-1.23%
1M
2.37%
YTD
-10.11%
6M
-13.82%
1Y
-28.88%
3Y*
-15.06%
5Y*
-10.13%
10Y*
-0.88%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GWH vs. CLX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
GWH
ESS Tech, Inc.
-51.06%-68.03%-65.61%-53.09%-78.76%13.27%
CLX
The Clorox Company
-10.11%-35.59%17.72%4.99%-17.00%-10.85%

Correlation

The correlation between GWH and CLX is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.18

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

0.09

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

0.07

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 5, 2021

0.06

The correlation between GWH and CLX shifts across timeframes, from 0.06 (all time) to 0.18 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Fundamentals

Market Cap

GWH:

$26.95M

CLX:

$10.78B

EPS

GWH:

-$2.40

CLX:

$6.17

PS Ratio

GWH:

15.65

CLX:

1.61

Total Revenue (TTM)

GWH:

$1.11M

CLX:

$6.76B

Gross Profit (TTM)

GWH:

-$32.30M

CLX:

$2.96B

EBITDA (TTM)

GWH:

-$47.24M

CLX:

$1.45B

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

GWH vs. CLX — Risk / Return Rank

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

GWH
GWH Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
GWH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3535
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GWH Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
GWH Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
GWH Calmar Ratio Rank: 3030
Calmar Ratio Rank
GWH Martin Ratio Rank: 3333
Martin Ratio Rank

CLX
CLX Risk / Return Rank: 55
Overall Rank
CLX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CLX Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
Sortino Ratio Rank
CLX Omega Ratio Rank: 77
Omega Ratio Rank
CLX Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
Calmar Ratio Rank
CLX Martin Ratio Rank: 11
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.

GWH vs. CLX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ESS Tech, Inc. (GWH) and The Clorox Company (CLX). 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.


GWHCLXDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

-0.14

-1.06

+0.92

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.55

-1.39

+2.94

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.18

0.83

+0.36

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

-0.34

-0.92

+0.58

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

-0.47

-1.93

+1.45

GWH vs. CLX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GWH Sharpe Ratio is -0.14, which is higher than the CLX Sharpe Ratio of -1.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GWH and CLX, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


GWHCLXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.14

-1.06

+0.92

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.42

-0.39

-0.03

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

-0.04

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.42

0.42

-0.84

Drawdowns

GWH vs. CLX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GWH drawdown since its inception was -99.78%, which is greater than CLX's maximum drawdown of -56.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GWH and CLX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GWHCLXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-99.78%

-56.34%

-43.44%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-91.46%

-31.52%

-59.94%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-97.41%

-46.11%

-51.30%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-99.78%

-46.11%

-53.67%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-56.34%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-99.74%

-55.12%

-44.62%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-78.82%

-13.41%

-65.41%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

65.31%

15.03%

+50.28%

Volatility

GWH vs. CLX - Volatility Comparison

ESS Tech, Inc. (GWH) has a higher volatility of 47.06% compared to The Clorox Company (CLX) at 10.77%. This indicates that GWH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CLX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GWHCLXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

47.06%

10.77%

+36.29%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

65.85%

22.86%

+42.99%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

221.52%

27.40%

+194.12%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

153.29%

25.94%

+127.35%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

147.35%

24.43%

+122.92%

Dividends

GWH vs. CLX - Dividend Comparison

GWH has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CLX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.60%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CLX
The Clorox Company
5.60%4.88%2.98%3.34%3.33%2.60%2.15%2.63%2.41%2.21%2.62%2.38%
GWH
ESS Tech, Inc.
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Financials

GWH vs. CLX - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between ESS Tech, Inc. and The Clorox Company. 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


0.00500.00M1.00B1.50B2.00B20222023202420252026
128.00K
1.67B
(GWH) Total Revenue
(CLX) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

Frequently Asked Questions


GWH and CLX have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GWH has higher volatility (47.06%) compared to CLX (10.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GWH dropped -99.78% vs CLX's -56.34%.

GWH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.14 vs -1.06), 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 GWH and CLX

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