MOH vs. MBS
MOH (Molina Healthcare, Inc.) is a stock, while MBS (Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF) is Intermediate Core-Plus Bond fund actively managed by Angel Oak. Over the past year, MOH returned -37.05% vs 6.88% for MBS. At a 0.14 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
MOH vs. MBS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MOH achieves a 6.50% return, which is significantly higher than MBS's 0.62% return.
MOH
- 1D
- 2.76%
- 1M
- -5.48%
- YTD
- 6.50%
- 6M
- 23.97%
- 1Y
- -37.05%
- 3Y*
- -13.66%
- 5Y*
- -5.79%
- 10Y*
- 13.86%
MBS
- 1D
- -0.29%
- 1M
- -0.22%
- YTD
- 0.62%
- 6M
- 0.84%
- 1Y
- 6.88%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MOH vs. MBS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
MOH Molina Healthcare, Inc. | 6.50% | -40.37% | -27.51% |
MBS Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF | 0.62% | 8.13% | 5.78% |
Correlation
The correlation between MOH and MBS is -0.00, 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 | -0.00 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 21, 2024 | 0.14 |
The correlation between MOH and MBS shifts across timeframes, from -0.00 (1 year) to 0.14 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
MOH vs. MBS — Risk / Return Rank
MOH
MBS
MOH vs. MBS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Molina Healthcare, Inc. (MOH) and Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF (MBS). 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.
| MOH | MBS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.98 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -4.09 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.91 | 1.45 | -0.54 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.62 | 3.14 | -3.76 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.85 | 9.89 | -10.75 |
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
| MOH | MBS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.63 | 2.36 | -2.98 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.15 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.34 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.29 | 1.60 | -1.31 |
Drawdowns
MOH vs. MBS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MOH drawdown since its inception was -70.76%, which is greater than MBS's maximum drawdown of -4.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MOH and MBS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MOH | MBS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -70.76% | -4.09% | -66.67% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -59.96% | -2.20% | -57.76% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -70.76% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -70.76% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -70.76% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -55.95% | -1.46% | -54.49% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -24.57% | -1.02% | -23.55% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 43.55% | 0.70% | +42.85% |
Volatility
MOH vs. MBS - Volatility Comparison
Molina Healthcare, Inc. (MOH) has a higher volatility of 11.13% compared to Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF (MBS) at 0.90%. This indicates that MOH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MBS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MOH | MBS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 11.13% | 0.90% | +10.23% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 43.33% | 2.00% | +41.33% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 59.41% | 2.93% | +56.48% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 39.82% | 3.99% | +35.83% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 40.72% | 3.99% | +36.73% |
Dividends
MOH vs. MBS - Dividend Comparison
MOH has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MBS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.61%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
MBS Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF | 5.61% | 5.28% | 4.52% |
MOH Molina Healthcare, Inc. | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MOH and MBS have a correlation of -0.00, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MOH has higher volatility (11.13%) compared to MBS (0.90%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MOH dropped -70.76% vs MBS's -4.09%.
MBS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.36 vs -0.63), 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 MOH and MBS
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