PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
INO vs. CLF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends
Financials

Performance

INO vs. CLF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Inovio Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (INO) and Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. (CLF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, INO achieves a -34.48% return, which is significantly lower than CLF's 6.55% return. Over the past 10 years, INO has underperformed CLF with an annualized return of -37.87%, while CLF has yielded a comparatively higher 12.38% annualized return.


INO

1D
-5.79%
1M
-0.00%
YTD
-34.48%
6M
-43.56%
1Y
-46.23%
3Y*
-45.25%
5Y*
-58.74%
10Y*
-37.87%

CLF

1D
-4.07%
1M
38.05%
YTD
6.55%
6M
8.60%
1Y
87.17%
3Y*
-2.03%
5Y*
-6.56%
10Y*
12.38%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

INO vs. CLF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
INO
Inovio Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
-34.48%-4.92%-70.10%-67.31%-68.74%-43.62%168.18%-17.50%-3.15%-40.49%
CLF
Cleveland-Cliffs Inc.
6.55%41.28%-53.97%26.75%-26.00%49.52%77.38%12.72%6.66%-14.27%

Correlation

The correlation between INO and CLF is 0.16, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.16

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

0.22

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

0.23

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

0.21

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 9, 1998

0.14

Fundamentals

Market Cap

INO:

$787.76M

CLF:

$7.98B

EPS

INO:

-$63.15

CLF:

-$2.37

PB Ratio

INO:

0.13

CLF:

1.37

Total Revenue (TTM)

INO:

$0.00

CLF:

$18.90B

Gross Profit (TTM)

INO:

-$1.50M

CLF:

-$528.00M

EBITDA (TTM)

INO:

-$22.01B

CLF:

$134.00M

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

INO vs. CLF — Risk / Return Rank

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

INO
INO Risk / Return Rank: 1919
Overall Rank
INO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1818
Sharpe Ratio Rank
INO Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
INO Omega Ratio Rank: 2323
Omega Ratio Rank
INO Calmar Ratio Rank: 1414
Calmar Ratio Rank
INO Martin Ratio Rank: 1313
Martin Ratio Rank

CLF
CLF Risk / Return Rank: 7272
Overall Rank
CLF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CLF Sortino Ratio Rank: 7272
Sortino Ratio Rank
CLF Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
CLF Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
CLF Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
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.

INO vs. CLF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Inovio Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (INO) and Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. (CLF). 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.


INOCLFDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

-0.53

1.28

-1.81

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

-0.27

1.84

-2.11

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

0.96

1.24

-0.28

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

-0.73

1.70

-2.43

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

-1.25

3.51

-4.75

INO vs. CLF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current INO Sharpe Ratio is -0.53, which is lower than the CLF Sharpe Ratio of 1.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of INO and CLF, 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


INOCLFDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.53

1.28

-1.81

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.68

-0.11

-0.57

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

-0.41

0.20

-0.61

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.18

0.14

-0.32

Drawdowns

INO vs. CLF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum INO drawdown since its inception was -99.95%, roughly equal to the maximum CLF drawdown of -98.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INO and CLF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


INOCLFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-99.95%

-98.78%

-1.17%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-63.41%

-51.67%

-11.74%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-92.44%

-74.46%

-17.98%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-99.13%

-82.37%

-16.76%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-99.72%

-82.37%

-17.35%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-99.95%

-85.57%

-14.38%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-92.35%

-47.60%

-44.75%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

37.06%

24.95%

+12.11%

Volatility

INO vs. CLF - Volatility Comparison

Inovio Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (INO) has a higher volatility of 23.06% compared to Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. (CLF) at 18.98%. This indicates that INO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CLF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


INOCLFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

23.06%

18.98%

+4.08%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

66.11%

45.50%

+20.61%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

88.27%

68.41%

+19.86%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

86.08%

59.44%

+26.64%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

93.38%

62.14%

+31.24%

Dividends

INO vs. CLF - Dividend Comparison

Neither INO nor CLF has paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
CLF
Cleveland-Cliffs Inc.
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.82%3.10%
INO
Inovio Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Financials

INO vs. CLF - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Inovio Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Cleveland-Cliffs 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


0.001.00B2.00B3.00B4.00B5.00B6.00B202220232024202520260
4.92B
(INO) Total Revenue
(CLF) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

Frequently Asked Questions


INO and CLF have a correlation of 0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

INO has higher volatility (23.06%) compared to CLF (18.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, INO dropped -99.95% vs CLF's -98.78%.

CLF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.28 vs -0.53), 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 INO and CLF

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