ML vs. NRDS

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

ML (MoneyLion Inc.) and NRDS (NerdWallet, Inc.) are both stocks. ML operates in Software - Application (Technology), while NRDS operates in Credit Services (Financial Services). At a 0.29 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

ML vs. NRDS - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

ML

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

NRDS

• 1D: 0.13%
• 1M: -12.64%
• YTD: -41.11%
• 6M: -47.26%
• 1Y: -28.43%
• 3Y*: -7.46%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ML vs. NRDS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
ML MoneyLion Inc.	0.00%	-0.13%	37.20%	237.04%	-84.62%	-29.17%
NRDS NerdWallet, Inc.	-41.11%	1.88%	-9.65%	53.33%	-38.26%	-45.05%

Correlation

The correlation between ML and NRDS is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.19
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 5, 2021	0.29

The correlation between ML and NRDS shifts across timeframes, from 0.19 (3 years) to 0.29 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Fundamentals

Total Revenue (TTM) ML : $545.91M NRDS : $849.60M
Gross Profit (TTM) ML : $409.26M NRDS : $790.50M
EBITDA (TTM) ML : $56.96M NRDS : $128.50M

Return for Risk

ML vs. NRDS — Risk / Return Rank

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

NRDS

NRDS Risk / Return Rank: 18
NRDS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 16
NRDS Sortino Ratio Rank: 19
NRDS Omega Ratio Rank: 18
NRDS Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
NRDS Martin Ratio Rank: 15

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. NRDS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MoneyLion Inc. (ML) and NerdWallet, Inc. (NRDS). 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	NRDS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	-0.59	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	—	-0.36	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	ML	NRDS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	—	-77.00%	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-52.42%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-55.36%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	—	-71.80%	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	—	-57.18%	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	23.60%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	ML	NRDS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	15.26%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	35.68%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	48.39%	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	—	68.04%	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	—	68.04%	—

Dividends

ML vs. NRDS - Dividend Comparison

Neither ML nor NRDS has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Financials

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ML and NRDS in my portfolio?

ML and NRDS have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.