LSF vs. WGS
LSF (Laird Superfood, Inc.) and WGS (GeneDx Holdings Corp.) are both stocks. LSF operates in Packaged Foods (Consumer Defensive), while WGS operates in Health Information Services (Healthcare). Over the past 5 years, LSF returned -37.13%/yr vs -33.09%/yr for WGS. At a 0.17 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
LSF vs. WGS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LSF achieves a 43.69% return, which is significantly higher than WGS's -59.23% return.
LSF
- 1D
- -5.06%
- 1M
- 2.90%
- YTD
- 43.69%
- 6M
- 30.20%
- 1Y
- -50.92%
- 3Y*
- 64.24%
- 5Y*
- -37.13%
- 10Y*
- —
WGS
- 1D
- -0.21%
- 1M
- -21.95%
- YTD
- -59.23%
- 6M
- -66.94%
- 1Y
- -27.18%
- 3Y*
- 101.82%
- 5Y*
- -33.09%
- 10Y*
- —
LSF vs. WGS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LSF Laird Superfood, Inc. | 43.69% | -71.83% | 765.93% | 8.33% | -93.56% | -72.44% | -0.86% |
WGS GeneDx Holdings Corp. | -59.23% | 69.22% | 2,694.91% | -68.41% | -94.09% | -59.60% | 12.65% |
Correlation
The correlation between LSF and WGS is 0.04, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.04 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.11 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.17 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 5, 2020 | 0.17 |
The correlation between LSF and WGS shifts across timeframes, from 0.04 (1 year) to 0.17 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Fundamentals
LSF:
$37.03M
WGS:
$1.56B
LSF:
-$1.00
WGS:
-$2.71
LSF:
1.08
WGS:
3.44
LSF:
$32.12M
WGS:
$442.68M
LSF:
$18.64M
WGS:
$302.56M
LSF:
-$6.81M
WGS:
-$51.08M
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
LSF vs. WGS — Risk / Return Rank
LSF
WGS
LSF vs. WGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Laird Superfood, Inc. (LSF) and GeneDx Holdings Corp. (WGS). 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.
| LSF | WGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.32 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.82 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.91 | 1.02 | -0.11 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.70 | -0.34 | -0.36 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.02 | -0.74 | -0.29 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| LSF | WGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.65 | -0.33 | -0.32 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.36 | -0.30 | -0.06 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.36 | -0.26 | -0.10 |
Drawdowns
LSF vs. WGS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LSF drawdown since its inception was -98.88%, roughly equal to the maximum WGS drawdown of -99.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LSF and WGS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LSF | WGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -98.88% | -99.85% | +0.97% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -72.99% | -79.40% | +6.41% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -79.90% | -84.28% | +4.38% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -98.01% | -99.73% | +1.72% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -94.48% | -93.78% | -0.70% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -82.54% | -83.36% | +0.82% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 49.74% | 36.97% | +12.77% |
Volatility
LSF vs. WGS - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Laird Superfood, Inc. (LSF) is 25.32%, while GeneDx Holdings Corp. (WGS) has a volatility of 72.31%. This indicates that LSF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than WGS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LSF | WGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 25.32% | 72.31% | -46.99% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 60.51% | 83.67% | -23.16% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 79.03% | 83.86% | -4.83% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 104.02% | 109.84% | -5.82% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 101.21% | 107.46% | -6.25% |
Dividends
LSF vs. WGS - Dividend Comparison
Neither LSF nor WGS has paid dividends to shareholders.
Financials
LSF vs. WGS - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Laird Superfood, Inc. and GeneDx Holdings Corp.. 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
Frequently Asked Questions
LSF and WGS have a correlation of 0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
WGS has higher volatility (72.31%) compared to LSF (25.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LSF dropped -98.88% vs WGS's -99.85%.
WGS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.33 vs -0.65), 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 LSF and WGS
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