ML vs. EVER

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

ML (MoneyLion Inc.) and EVER (EverQuote, Inc.) are both stocks. ML operates in Software - Application (Technology), while EVER operates in Internet Content & Information (Communication Services). At a 0.24 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

ML vs. EVER - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MoneyLion Inc. (ML) and EverQuote, Inc. (EVER). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

ML

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EVER

• 1D: -0.10%
• 1M: -5.85%
• YTD: -28.52%
• 6M: -27.77%
• 1Y: -23.93%
• 3Y*: 34.46%
• 5Y*: -10.62%
• 10Y*: —

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

ML vs. EVER - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
ML MoneyLion Inc.	0.00%	-0.13%	37.20%	237.04%	-84.62%	-64.34%	15.31%
EVER EverQuote, Inc.	-28.52%	35.07%	63.32%	-16.96%	-5.87%	-58.07%	-2.86%

Correlation

The correlation between ML and EVER is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.22
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.25
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 17, 2020	0.24

Fundamentals

Total Revenue (TTM) ML : $545.91M EVER : $716.74M
Gross Profit (TTM) ML : $409.26M EVER : $698.48M
EBITDA (TTM) ML : $56.96M EVER : $78.59M

Return for Risk

ML vs. EVER — Risk / Return Rank

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

EVER

EVER Risk / Return Rank: 28
EVER Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
EVER Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
EVER Omega Ratio Rank: 31
EVER Calmar Ratio Rank: 25
EVER Martin Ratio Rank: 23

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.

ML vs. EVER - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MoneyLion Inc. (ML) and EverQuote, Inc. (EVER). 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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ML	EVER	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	-0.30	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	-0.15	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	—	0.01	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	ML	EVER	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	—	-91.18%	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-48.80%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-51.97%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-84.02%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	—	-69.26%	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	—	-57.62%	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	25.26%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	ML	EVER	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	15.86%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	64.04%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	80.09%	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	—	72.73%	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	—	75.89%	—

Dividends

ML vs. EVER - Dividend Comparison

Neither ML nor EVER has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Financials

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ML and EVER in my portfolio?

ML and EVER have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.