LAES vs. COST

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

LAES (SEALSQ Corp) and COST (Costco Wholesale Corporation) are both stocks. LAES operates in Semiconductors (Technology), while COST operates in Discount Stores (Consumer Defensive). Over the past 3 years, LAES returned -31.28%/yr vs 25.18%/yr for COST. At a 0.05 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

LAES vs. COST - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SEALSQ Corp (LAES) and Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LAES achieves a -14.81% return, which is significantly lower than COST's 13.35% return.

LAES

• 1D: 0.63%
• 1M: 10.27%
• YTD: -14.81%
• 6M: -34.42%
• 1Y: -6.94%
• 3Y*: -31.28%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

COST

• 1D: 0.30%
• 1M: -3.37%
• YTD: 13.35%
• 6M: 10.14%
• 1Y: -3.42%
• 3Y*: 25.18%
• 5Y*: 22.05%
• 10Y*: 22.25%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LAES vs. COST - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
LAES SEALSQ Corp	-14.81%	-38.54%	380.47%	-92.82%
COST Costco Wholesale Corporation	13.35%	-5.39%	39.62%	39.75%

Correlation

The correlation between LAES and COST is -0.10, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.10
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.05
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 24, 2023	0.05

The correlation between LAES and COST shifts across timeframes, from -0.10 (1 year) to 0.05 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Fundamentals

EPS LAES : -$0.43 COST : $26.51
PS Ratio LAES : 10.60 COST : 1.11
Total Revenue (TTM) LAES : $35.37M COST : $293.59B
Gross Profit (TTM) LAES : $13.21M COST : $11.12B
EBITDA (TTM) LAES : -$41.81M COST : $12.48B

Return for Risk

LAES vs. COST — Risk / Return Rank

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

LAES

LAES Risk / Return Rank: 43
LAES Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
LAES Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
LAES Omega Ratio Rank: 47
LAES Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
LAES Martin Ratio Rank: 39

COST

COST Risk / Return Rank: 32
COST Sharpe Ratio Rank: 34
COST Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
COST Omega Ratio Rank: 28
COST Calmar Ratio Rank: 35
COST Martin Ratio Rank: 33

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.

LAES vs. COST - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SEALSQ Corp (LAES) and Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST). 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.

	LAES	COST	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.06	-0.18	+0.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.78	-0.13	+0.91
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.08	0.98	+0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.10	-0.22	+0.13
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.16	-0.51	+0.35
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LAES vs. COST - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LAES Sharpe Ratio is -0.06, which is higher than the COST Sharpe Ratio of -0.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LAES and COST, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	LAES	COST	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.06	-0.18	+0.12
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.98	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	1.02	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.28	0.59	-0.86

Drawdowns

LAES vs. COST - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LAES drawdown since its inception was -98.44%, which is greater than COST's maximum drawdown of -53.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LAES and COST.

Drawdown Indicators

	LAES	COST	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-98.44%	-53.39%	-45.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-72.68%	-15.38%	-57.30%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-98.07%	-20.74%	-77.33%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-31.40%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-31.40%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-85.34%	-10.93%	-74.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-84.70%	-13.36%	-71.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	42.96%	7.15%	+35.81%

Volatility

LAES vs. COST - Volatility Comparison

SEALSQ Corp (LAES) has a higher volatility of 28.36% compared to Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) at 7.71%. This indicates that LAES's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than COST based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LAES	COST	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	28.36%	7.71%	+20.65%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	66.00%	14.53%	+51.47%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	110.53%	18.79%	+91.74%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	170.27%	22.71%	+147.56%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	170.27%	21.95%	+148.32%

Dividends

LAES vs. COST - Dividend Comparison

LAES has not paid dividends to shareholders, while COST's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.55%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
COST Costco Wholesale Corporation	0.55%	0.59%	0.49%	2.87%	0.76%	0.54%	3.38%	0.86%	1.08%	4.81%	1.09%	4.06%
LAES SEALSQ Corp	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

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LAES and COST in my portfolio?

LAES and COST have a correlation of -0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LAES or COST?

LAES has higher volatility (28.36%) compared to COST (7.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LAES dropped -98.44% vs COST's -53.39%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LAES currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.06 vs -0.18), 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.