IMO vs. CNQ
IMO (Imperial Oil Limited) and CNQ (Canadian Natural Resources Limited) are both stocks. Both are in the Energy sector — IMO in Oil & Gas Integrated, CNQ in Oil & Gas E&P. Over the past 10 years, IMO returned 17.40%/yr vs 16.14%/yr for CNQ. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined.
Performance
IMO vs. CNQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IMO achieves a 44.74% return, which is significantly higher than CNQ's 29.75% return. Over the past 10 years, IMO has outperformed CNQ with an annualized return of 17.40%, while CNQ has yielded a comparatively lower 16.14% annualized return.
IMO
- 1D
- 2.60%
- 1M
- 1.94%
- 6M
- 35.05%
- YTD
- 44.74%
- 1Y
- 53.11%
- 3Y*
- 39.71%
- 5Y*
- 37.67%
- 10Y*
- 17.40%
CNQ
- 1D
- 2.97%
- 1M
- -3.92%
- 6M
- 35.98%
- YTD
- 29.75%
- 1Y
- 40.45%
- 3Y*
- 20.54%
- 5Y*
- 26.78%
- 10Y*
- 16.14%
IMO vs. CNQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IMO Imperial Oil Limited | 44.74% | 43.85% | 10.47% | 20.89% | 38.00% | 95.29% | -25.37% | 7.16% | -17.21% | -8.36% |
CNQ Canadian Natural Resources Limited | 29.75% | 15.58% | -1.31% | 23.72% | 42.82% | 83.55% | -19.06% | 39.72% | -29.92% | 15.97% |
Correlation
The correlation between IMO and CNQ is 0.75, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.75 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.77 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.80 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.74 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 31, 2000 | 0.69 |
The correlation between IMO and CNQ shifts across timeframes, from 0.69 (all time) to 0.80 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Fundamentals
IMO:
$61.48B
CNQ:
$89.79B
IMO:
$5.92
CNQ:
CA$4.66
IMO:
20.89
CNQ:
13.09
IMO:
0.46
CNQ:
0.63
IMO:
1.31
CNQ:
3.12
IMO:
2.63
CNQ:
2.86
IMO:
$46.55B
CNQ:
CA$40.74B
IMO:
$7.69B
CNQ:
CA$12.53B
IMO:
$6.36B
CNQ:
CA$22.99B
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
IMO vs. CNQ — Risk / Return Rank
IMO
CNQ
IMO vs. CNQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Imperial Oil Limited (IMO) and Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNQ). 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.
| IMO | CNQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.56 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.68 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.23 | +0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.76 | 1.89 | +0.86 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.40 | 5.98 | +1.42 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IMO vs. CNQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IMO drawdown since its inception was -84.82%, which is greater than CNQ's maximum drawdown of -80.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMO and CNQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IMO | CNQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -84.82% | -80.75% | -4.07% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -19.36% | -21.45% | +2.09% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.95% | -35.85% | +12.90% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -29.72% | -35.85% | +6.13% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -76.96% | -77.84% | +0.88% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -10.17% | -13.11% | +2.94% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -21.18% | -23.50% | +2.32% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.20% | 6.79% | +0.41% |
Volatility
IMO vs. CNQ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Imperial Oil Limited (IMO) is 8.31%, while Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNQ) has a volatility of 9.80%. This indicates that IMO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IMO | CNQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.31% | 9.80% | -1.49% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 22.35% | 23.85% | -1.50% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 27.76% | 29.77% | -2.01% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 32.45% | 32.91% | -0.46% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 35.59% | 40.23% | -4.64% |
Dividends
IMO vs. CNQ - Dividend Comparison
IMO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.87%, less than CNQ's 4.10% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNQ Canadian Natural Resources Limited | 4.10% | 5.01% | 5.02% | 4.17% | 6.31% | 3.78% | 5.26% | 3.49% | 4.56% | 3.08% | 2.94% | 4.21% |
IMO Imperial Oil Limited | 1.87% | 2.40% | 2.84% | 2.73% | 2.30% | 2.28% | 3.50% | 2.41% | 2.36% | 2.02% | 1.70% | 1.66% |
Financials
IMO vs. CNQ - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Imperial Oil Limited and Canadian Natural Resources Limited. 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
IMO vs. CNQ - Profitability Comparison
IMO - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, Imperial Oil Limited reported a gross profit of 2.51B and revenue of 12.45B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 20.2%.
CNQ - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, Canadian Natural Resources Limited reported a gross profit of 3.48B and revenue of 10.84B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 32.1%.
IMO - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, Imperial Oil Limited reported an operating income of 1.23B and revenue of 12.45B, resulting in an operating margin of 9.9%.
CNQ - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, Canadian Natural Resources Limited reported an operating income of 2.68B and revenue of 10.84B, resulting in an operating margin of 24.7%.
IMO - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, Imperial Oil Limited reported a net income of 940.00M and revenue of 12.45B, resulting in a net margin of 7.6%.
CNQ - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, Canadian Natural Resources Limited reported a net income of 1.35B and revenue of 10.84B, resulting in a net margin of 12.5%.
Frequently Asked Questions
IMO and CNQ have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CNQ has higher volatility (9.80%) compared to IMO (8.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IMO dropped -84.82% vs CNQ's -80.75%.
IMO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.93 vs 1.37), 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 IMO and CNQ
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