PG vs. CDUAF
PG (The Procter & Gamble Company) and CDUAF (Canadian Utilities Limited) are both stocks. PG operates in Household & Personal Products (Consumer Defensive), while CDUAF operates in Utilities - Diversified (Utilities). Over the past 10 years, PG returned 8.46%/yr vs 7.27%/yr for CDUAF. At a 0.14 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
PG vs. CDUAF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PG achieves a 4.11% return, which is significantly lower than CDUAF's 21.53% return. Over the past 10 years, PG has outperformed CDUAF with an annualized return of 8.46%, while CDUAF has yielded a comparatively lower 7.27% annualized return.
PG
- 1D
- 0.13%
- 1M
- -0.88%
- 6M
- 5.17%
- YTD
- 4.11%
- 1Y
- -3.68%
- 3Y*
- 2.39%
- 5Y*
- 4.03%
- 10Y*
- 8.46%
CDUAF
- 1D
- -0.32%
- 1M
- 0.25%
- 6M
- 21.53%
- YTD
- 21.53%
- 1Y
- 39.81%
- 3Y*
- 20.35%
- 5Y*
- 11.23%
- 10Y*
- 7.27%
PG vs. CDUAF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PG The Procter & Gamble Company | 4.11% | -12.26% | 17.25% | -0.86% | -5.05% | 20.52% | 14.15% | 39.70% | 3.57% | 12.69% |
CDUAF Canadian Utilities Limited | 21.53% | 35.10% | 6.34% | -6.25% | -1.87% | 25.16% | -14.69% | 37.49% | -19.67% | 15.55% |
Correlation
The correlation between PG and CDUAF is 0.16, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.16 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.18 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.20 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.20 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 16, 2007 | 0.14 |
Fundamentals
PG:
$342.40B
CDUAF:
$7.64B
PG:
$5.24
CDUAF:
CA$0.29
PG:
28.05
CDUAF:
180.45
PG:
4.11
CDUAF:
4.12
PG:
6.58
CDUAF:
2.86
PG:
$86.72B
CDUAF:
CA$3.46B
PG:
$43.64B
CDUAF:
CA$1.39B
PG:
$22.63B
CDUAF:
CA$1.76B
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
PG vs. CDUAF — Risk / Return Rank
PG
CDUAF
PG vs. CDUAF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for The Procter & Gamble Company (PG) and Canadian Utilities Limited (CDUAF). 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.
| PG | CDUAF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.66 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.54 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.98 | 1.46 | -0.48 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.29 | 7.34 | -7.63 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.52 | 18.11 | -18.63 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PG vs. CDUAF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PG drawdown since its inception was -54.25%, smaller than the maximum CDUAF drawdown of -71.22%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PG and CDUAF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PG | CDUAF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -54.25% | -71.22% | +16.97% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.52% | -5.35% | -10.17% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.15% | -18.96% | -2.19% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.77% | -31.94% | +8.17% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -23.77% | -41.92% | +18.15% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -14.78% | -15.81% | +1.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.16% | -39.77% | +27.61% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.73% | 2.16% | +6.57% |
Volatility
PG vs. CDUAF - Volatility Comparison
The Procter & Gamble Company (PG) has a higher volatility of 6.83% compared to Canadian Utilities Limited (CDUAF) at 4.13%. This indicates that PG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CDUAF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PG | CDUAF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.83% | 4.13% | +2.70% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.83% | 11.96% | +3.87% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.55% | 16.15% | +3.40% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.02% | 19.08% | -1.06% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.13% | 24.93% | -5.80% |
Dividends
PG vs. CDUAF - Dividend Comparison
PG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.90%, less than CDUAF's 3.60% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CDUAF Canadian Utilities Limited | 3.60% | 4.21% | 5.47% | 6.05% | 5.03% | 4.85% | 5.32% | 4.24% | 4.49% | 4.82% | 4.82% | 5.11% |
PG The Procter & Gamble Company | 2.90% | 2.91% | 2.36% | 2.55% | 2.38% | 2.08% | 2.24% | 2.37% | 3.09% | 2.98% | 3.18% | 3.31% |
Financials
PG vs. CDUAF - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between The Procter & Gamble Company and Canadian Utilities Limited. You can select fields from income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements to easily visualize and compare the financial health of both companies.
Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities
PG vs. CDUAF - Profitability Comparison
PG - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, The Procter & Gamble Company reported a gross profit of 10.51B and revenue of 21.24B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 49.5%.
CDUAF - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, Canadian Utilities Limited reported a gross profit of 761.00M and revenue of 1.08B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 70.2%.
PG - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, The Procter & Gamble Company reported an operating income of 4.58B and revenue of 21.24B, resulting in an operating margin of 21.6%.
CDUAF - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, Canadian Utilities Limited reported an operating income of 393.00M and revenue of 1.08B, resulting in an operating margin of 36.3%.
PG - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, The Procter & Gamble Company reported a net income of 18.50M and revenue of 21.24B, resulting in a net margin of 0.1%.
CDUAF - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, Canadian Utilities Limited reported a net income of 224.00M and revenue of 1.08B, resulting in a net margin of 20.7%.
Frequently Asked Questions
PG and CDUAF have a correlation of 0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PG has higher volatility (6.83%) compared to CDUAF (4.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PG dropped -54.25% vs CDUAF's -71.22%.
CDUAF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.43 vs -0.23), 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 PG and CDUAF
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