PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MT vs. PANW
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends
Financials

Performance

MT vs. PANW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ArcelorMittal (MT) and Palo Alto Networks, Inc. (PANW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MT achieves a 40.56% return, which is significantly lower than PANW's 55.48% return. Over the past 10 years, MT has underperformed PANW with an annualized return of 17.84%, while PANW has yielded a comparatively higher 30.30% annualized return.


MT

1D
0.54%
1M
-3.53%
YTD
40.56%
6M
42.09%
1Y
115.18%
3Y*
35.82%
5Y*
18.31%
10Y*
17.84%

PANW

1D
-0.48%
1M
9.91%
YTD
55.48%
6M
51.14%
1Y
43.75%
3Y*
32.91%
5Y*
36.07%
10Y*
30.30%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MT vs. PANW - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
MT
ArcelorMittal
40.56%100.13%-16.92%10.28%-16.44%40.29%30.56%-14.14%-35.85%47.53%
PANW
Palo Alto Networks, Inc.
55.48%1.23%23.41%111.32%-24.81%56.66%53.68%22.78%29.95%15.91%

Correlation

The correlation between MT and PANW is 0.05, 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

0.05

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.11

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.18

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.23

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 20, 2012

0.21

The correlation between MT and PANW shifts across timeframes, from 0.05 (1 year) to 0.23 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Fundamentals

Market Cap

MT:

$48.71B

PANW:

$213.08B

EPS

MT:

$3.82

PANW:

$1.17

PE Ratio

MT:

16.71

PANW:

244.25

PEG Ratio

MT:

1.03

PANW:

0.02

PS Ratio

MT:

0.79

PANW:

19.41

PB Ratio

MT:

0.88

PANW:

7.70

Total Revenue (TTM)

MT:

$62.01B

PANW:

$10.61B

Gross Profit (TTM)

MT:

$34.15B

PANW:

$7.63B

EBITDA (TTM)

MT:

$5.81B

PANW:

$1.33B

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

MT vs. PANW — Risk / Return Rank

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

MT
MT Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
MT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MT Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
MT Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
MT Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
MT Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
Martin Ratio Rank

PANW
PANW Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
PANW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PANW Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
PANW Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
PANW Calmar Ratio Rank: 6666
Calmar Ratio Rank
PANW Martin Ratio Rank: 6666
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

MT vs. PANW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ArcelorMittal (MT) and Palo Alto Networks, Inc. (PANW). 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.


MTPANWDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.60

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.70

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.42

1.21

+0.20

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.02

1.22

+2.80

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.85

2.76

+11.09

MT vs. PANW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MT Sharpe Ratio is 2.73, which is higher than the PANW Sharpe Ratio of 1.13. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MT and PANW, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

MT vs. PANW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MT drawdown since its inception was -97.34%, which is greater than PANW's maximum drawdown of -47.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MT and PANW.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MTPANWDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-97.34%

-47.98%

-49.36%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-28.84%

-36.01%

+7.17%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-30.83%

-36.01%

+5.18%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-45.99%

-36.01%

-9.98%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-81.10%

-47.98%

-33.12%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-62.82%

-4.69%

-58.13%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-69.39%

-14.67%

-54.72%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.35%

15.89%

-7.54%

Volatility

MT vs. PANW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ArcelorMittal (MT) is 14.41%, while Palo Alto Networks, Inc. (PANW) has a volatility of 16.22%. This indicates that MT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PANW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MTPANWDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

14.41%

16.22%

-1.81%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

36.14%

32.17%

+3.97%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

42.49%

39.05%

+3.44%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

39.91%

41.75%

-1.84%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

44.91%

38.64%

+6.27%

Dividends

MT vs. PANW - Dividend Comparison

MT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.90%, while PANW has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
MT
ArcelorMittal
0.90%1.21%2.16%1.55%1.45%0.94%0.00%1.14%0.48%0.00%0.00%4.03%
PANW
Palo Alto Networks, Inc.
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Financials

MT vs. PANW - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between ArcelorMittal and Palo Alto Networks, Inc.. You can select fields from income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements to easily visualize and compare the financial health of both companies.


Quarterly
Annual

Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities


0.005.00B10.00B15.00B20.00B20222023202420252026
15.46B
3.00B
(MT) Total Revenue
(PANW) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

MT vs. PANW - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between ArcelorMittal and Palo Alto Networks, Inc. over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

Gross Margin
Operating Margin
Net Margin
Quarterly
Annual

0.0%20.0%40.0%60.0%80.0%100.0%20222023202420252026
100.0%
67.6%
Portfolio components
MT - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, ArcelorMittal reported a gross profit of 15.46B and revenue of 15.46B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 100.0%.

PANW - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Palo Alto Networks, Inc. reported a gross profit of 2.03B and revenue of 3.00B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 67.6%.

MT - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, ArcelorMittal reported an operating income of 753.00M and revenue of 15.46B, resulting in an operating margin of 4.9%.

PANW - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Palo Alto Networks, Inc. reported an operating income of -186.00M and revenue of 3.00B, resulting in an operating margin of -6.2%.

MT - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, ArcelorMittal reported a net income of 575.00M and revenue of 15.46B, resulting in a net margin of 3.7%.

PANW - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Palo Alto Networks, Inc. reported a net income of -177.00M and revenue of 3.00B, resulting in a net margin of -5.9%.


Frequently Asked Questions


MT and PANW have a correlation of 0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

PANW has higher volatility (16.22%) compared to MT (14.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MT dropped -97.34% vs PANW's -47.98%.

MT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.73 vs 1.13), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MT and PANW

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