MU.TO vs. CLS.TO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

MU.TO (Micron CDR (CAD Hedged)) and CLS.TO (Celestica Inc.) are both stocks. Both are in the Technology sector — MU.TO in Semiconductors, CLS.TO in Electronic Components. Over the past year, MU.TO returned 811.44% vs 262.40% for CLS.TO. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

MU.TO vs. CLS.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Micron CDR (CAD Hedged) (MU.TO) and Celestica Inc. (CLS.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MU.TO achieves a 245.66% return, which is significantly higher than CLS.TO's 45.57% return.

MU.TO

• 1D: -7.53%
• 1M: 49.58%
• YTD: 245.66%
• 6M: 314.64%
• 1Y: 811.44%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CLS.TO

• 1D: -7.08%
• 1M: 4.72%
• YTD: 45.57%
• 6M: 31.48%
• 1Y: 262.40%
• 3Y*: 223.24%
• 5Y*: 124.26%
• 10Y*: 45.54%

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

MU.TO vs. CLS.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MU.TO Micron CDR (CAD Hedged)	245.66%	231.07%	-4.69%
CLS.TO Celestica Inc.	45.57%	206.05%	107.93%

Correlation

The correlation between MU.TO and CLS.TO is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.42
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 19, 2024	0.47

Return for Risk

MU.TO vs. CLS.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

MU.TO

MU.TO Risk / Return Rank: 99
MU.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
MU.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
MU.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 98
MU.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
MU.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 100

CLS.TO

CLS.TO Risk / Return Rank: 94
CLS.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
CLS.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
CLS.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 91
CLS.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
CLS.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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.

MU.TO vs. CLS.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Micron CDR (CAD Hedged) (MU.TO) and Celestica Inc. (CLS.TO). 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.

	MU.TO	CLS.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	13.18	3.74	+9.44
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	6.91	3.30	+3.61
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.88	1.45	+0.43
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	28.24	8.27	+19.97
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	111.72	20.88	+90.85
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MU.TO vs. CLS.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MU.TO Sharpe Ratio is 13.18, which is higher than the CLS.TO Sharpe Ratio of 3.74. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MU.TO and CLS.TO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MU.TO	CLS.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.18	3.74	+9.44
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	2.23	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.94	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	4.66	0.22	+4.44

Drawdowns

MU.TO vs. CLS.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MU.TO drawdown since its inception was -43.53%, smaller than the maximum CLS.TO drawdown of -97.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MU.TO and CLS.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	MU.TO	CLS.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-43.53%	-97.34%	+53.81%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-30.28%	-31.71%	+1.43%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-54.25%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-54.25%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-79.32%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.53%	-9.47%	+1.94%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.58%	-75.62%	+66.04%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.64%	12.54%	-4.90%

Volatility

MU.TO vs. CLS.TO - Volatility Comparison

Micron CDR (CAD Hedged) (MU.TO) has a higher volatility of 25.96% compared to Celestica Inc. (CLS.TO) at 24.23%. This indicates that MU.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CLS.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MU.TO	CLS.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	25.96%	24.23%	+1.73%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	52.37%	53.38%	-1.01%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	64.90%	70.23%	-5.33%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	65.92%	56.21%	+9.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	65.92%	48.60%	+17.32%

Dividends

MU.TO vs. CLS.TO - Dividend Comparison

MU.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.05%, while CLS.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
CLS.TO Celestica Inc.	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MU.TO Micron CDR (CAD Hedged)	0.05%	0.16%	0.27%

Financials

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MU.TO and CLS.TO in my portfolio?

MU.TO and CLS.TO have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.