PNGAY vs. BABA
Compare and contrast key facts about Ping An Insurance Company of China (PNGAY) and Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA).
Performance
PNGAY vs. BABA - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
PNGAY vs. BABA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PNGAY Ping An Insurance Company of China | -7.64% | 52.29% | 38.53% | -27.60% | -2.17% | -39.34% | 5.51% | 39.67% | -15.03% | 113.23% |
BABA Alibaba Group Holding Limited | -14.41% | 75.80% | 11.77% | -10.83% | -25.84% | -48.96% | 9.73% | 54.74% | -20.51% | 96.37% |
Fundamentals
PNGAY:
$140.32B
BABA:
$302.83B
PNGAY:
$14.91
BABA:
$37.64
PNGAY:
1.04
BABA:
3.33
PNGAY:
0.13
BABA:
0.26
PNGAY:
0.14
BABA:
0.30
PNGAY:
0.14
BABA:
0.29
PNGAY:
$1.00T
BABA:
$1.01T
PNGAY:
$999.77B
BABA:
$411.95B
PNGAY:
$122.48B
BABA:
$132.37B
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PNGAY achieves a -7.64% return, which is significantly higher than BABA's -14.41% return. Over the past 10 years, PNGAY has outperformed BABA with an annualized return of 9.42%, while BABA has yielded a comparatively lower 5.31% annualized return.
PNGAY
- 1D
- 3.87%
- 1M
- -10.47%
- YTD
- -7.64%
- 6M
- 13.87%
- 1Y
- 36.78%
- 3Y*
- 12.78%
- 5Y*
- -3.28%
- 10Y*
- 9.42%
BABA
- 1D
- 2.85%
- 1M
- -12.94%
- YTD
- -14.41%
- 6M
- -29.80%
- 1Y
- -3.52%
- 3Y*
- 8.94%
- 5Y*
- -10.05%
- 10Y*
- 5.31%
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
PNGAY vs. BABA — Risk / Return Rank
PNGAY
BABA
PNGAY vs. BABA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Ping An Insurance Company of China (PNGAY) and Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA). 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.
| PNGAY | BABA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.23 | -0.08 | +1.31 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.80 | 0.23 | +1.57 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 1.03 | +0.21 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.52 | -0.10 | +1.62 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.67 | -0.24 | +5.90 |
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 graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| PNGAY | BABA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.23 | -0.08 | +1.31 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.08 | -0.20 | +0.12 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.27 | 0.12 | +0.15 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.01 | 0.07 | -0.06 |
Correlation
The correlation between PNGAY and BABA is 0.49, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.
Dividends
PNGAY vs. BABA - Dividend Comparison
PNGAY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.58%, more than BABA's 1.59% yield.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PNGAY Ping An Insurance Company of China | 4.58% | 4.23% | 5.81% | 7.66% | 5.81% | 4.47% | 2.05% | 1.88% | 2.35% | 1.17% | 3.03% | 1.99% |
BABA Alibaba Group Holding Limited | 1.59% | 1.36% | 1.96% | 1.29% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Drawdowns
PNGAY vs. BABA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PNGAY drawdown since its inception was -91.80%, which is greater than BABA's maximum drawdown of -80.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PNGAY and BABA.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| PNGAY | BABA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -91.80% | -80.09% | -11.71% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -23.83% | -35.58% | +11.75% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -63.87% | -74.12% | +10.25% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -66.83% | -80.09% | +13.26% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -26.27% | -58.34% | +32.07% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -43.00% | -37.23% | -5.77% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.39% | 15.43% | -9.04% |
Volatility
PNGAY vs. BABA - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Ping An Insurance Company of China (PNGAY) is 11.03%, while Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA) has a volatility of 12.47%. This indicates that PNGAY experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BABA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| PNGAY | BABA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 11.03% | 12.47% | -1.44% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 20.49% | 29.36% | -8.87% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 29.98% | 45.97% | -15.99% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 40.81% | 51.12% | -10.31% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 34.77% | 43.22% | -8.45% |
Financials
PNGAY vs. BABA - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Ping An Insurance Company of China and Alibaba Group Holding 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
PNGAY vs. BABA - Profitability Comparison
PNGAY - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Ping An Insurance Company of China reported a gross profit of 234.96B and revenue of 234.96B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 100.0%.
BABA - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Alibaba Group Holding Limited reported a gross profit of 112.89B and revenue of 280.91B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 40.2%.
PNGAY - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Ping An Insurance Company of China reported an operating income of 4.50B and revenue of 234.96B, resulting in an operating margin of 1.9%.
BABA - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Alibaba Group Holding Limited reported an operating income of 18.44B and revenue of 280.91B, resulting in an operating margin of 6.6%.
PNGAY - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Ping An Insurance Company of China reported a net income of 1.90B and revenue of 234.96B, resulting in a net margin of 0.8%.
BABA - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Alibaba Group Holding Limited reported a net income of 16.16B and revenue of 280.91B, resulting in a net margin of 5.8%.