LMT vs. CBON
LMT (Lockheed Martin Corporation) is a stock, while CBON (VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF) is Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the ChinaBond China High Quality Bond Index. Over the past 10 years, LMT returned 11.54%/yr vs 3.01%/yr for CBON. Their 0.04 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship.
Performance
LMT vs. CBON - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LMT achieves a 21.88% return, which is significantly higher than CBON's 5.29% return. Over the past 10 years, LMT has outperformed CBON with an annualized return of 11.54%, while CBON has yielded a comparatively lower 3.01% annualized return.
LMT
- 1D
- 2.46%
- 1M
- 15.36%
- 6M
- -0.22%
- YTD
- 21.88%
- 1Y
- 42.06%
- 3Y*
- 11.61%
- 5Y*
- 11.85%
- 10Y*
- 11.54%
- ALL TIME*
- 12.38%
CBON
- 1D
- -0.25%
- 1M
- 0.35%
- 6M
- 4.74%
- YTD
- 5.29%
- 1Y
- 8.54%
- 3Y*
- 4.82%
- 5Y*
- 2.11%
- 10Y*
- 3.01%
- ALL TIME*
- 2.44%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $207.99K | $136.05K | $172.83K | |
| $682.65M | $676.87M | $688.00M |
LMT vs. CBON - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LMT Lockheed Martin Corporation | 21.88% | 2.47% | 10.02% | -4.31% | 40.48% | 3.15% | -6.49% | 52.55% | -16.35% | 31.77% |
CBON VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF | 5.29% | 5.46% | 1.85% | 2.92% | -7.99% | 5.93% | 12.01% | 2.67% | 1.88% | 6.96% |
Correlation
The correlation between LMT and CBON is 0.01, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.01 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | -0.01 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.02 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.03 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 11, 2014 | 0.04 |
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
LMT vs. CBON — Risk / Return Rank
LMT
CBON
LMT vs. CBON - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lockheed Martin Corporation (LMT) and VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF (CBON). 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.
| LMT | CBON | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.84 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.31 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 1.47 | -0.18 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.58 | 6.42 | -4.84 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.38 | 24.44 | -21.06 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LMT vs. CBON - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LMT drawdown since its inception was -79.29%, which is greater than CBON's maximum drawdown of -14.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LMT and CBON.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LMT | CBON | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -79.29% | -14.13% | -65.16% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -26.87% | -1.34% | -25.53% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -31.79% | -4.56% | -27.23% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -31.79% | -14.13% | -17.66% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.67% | -14.13% | -22.54% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.34% | -0.33% | -13.01% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -26.82% | -3.95% | -22.87% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 12.54% | 0.35% | +12.19% |
Volatility
LMT vs. CBON - Volatility Comparison
Lockheed Martin Corporation (LMT) has a higher volatility of 12.24% compared to VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF (CBON) at 1.06%. This indicates that LMT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CBON based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LMT | CBON | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.24% | 1.06% | +11.18% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 22.08% | 2.72% | +19.36% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 27.06% | 3.57% | +23.49% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 23.79% | 4.90% | +18.89% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.18% | 5.55% | +18.63% |
Dividends
LMT vs. CBON - Dividend Comparison
LMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.34%, more than CBON's 1.51% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CBON VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF | 1.51% | 1.66% | 2.15% | 3.01% | 2.70% | 3.05% | 2.87% | 3.87% | 3.39% | 3.33% | 3.25% | 2.78% |
LMT Lockheed Martin Corporation | 2.34% | 2.76% | 2.62% | 2.68% | 2.34% | 2.98% | 2.76% | 2.31% | 3.13% | 2.32% | 2.71% | 2.83% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LMT and CBON have a correlation of 0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LMT has higher volatility (12.24%) compared to CBON (1.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LMT dropped -79.29% vs CBON's -14.13%.
CBON currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.41 vs 1.57), 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 LMT and CBON
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