PZG vs. ERAS

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

PZG (Paramount Gold Nevada Corp.) and ERAS (Erasca, Inc.) are both stocks. PZG operates in Gold (Basic Materials), while ERAS operates in Biotechnology (Healthcare). Over the past 5 years, PZG returned 4.47%/yr vs -2.87%/yr for ERAS. Their 0.06 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship.

Performance

PZG vs. ERAS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Paramount Gold Nevada Corp. (PZG) and Erasca, Inc. (ERAS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PZG achieves a -11.11% return, which is significantly lower than ERAS's 387.90% return.

PZG

• 1D: -3.45%
• 1M: -6.67%
• 6M: -36.72%
• YTD: -11.11%
• 1Y: 73.81%
• 3Y*: 52.15%
• 5Y*: 4.47%
• 10Y*: -7.02%
• ALL TIME*: -5.93%

ERAS

• 1D: -2.84%
• 1M: -1.73%
• 6M: 72.69%
• YTD: 387.90%
• 1Y: 1,205.76%
• 3Y*: 89.91%
• 5Y*: -2.87%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 2.66%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
ERAS Erasca, Inc.	$64.00M	$90.42M	$77.82M
PZG Paramount Gold Nevada Corp.	$464.35K	$496.83K	$763.62K

PZG vs. ERAS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
PZG Paramount Gold Nevada Corp.	-11.11%	268.42%	-8.80%	8.70%	-50.62%	-26.30%
ERAS Erasca, Inc.	387.90%	48.21%	17.84%	-50.58%	-72.34%	-2.01%

Correlation

The correlation between PZG and ERAS is 0.14, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.14
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.08
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.06
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 16, 2021	0.06

Fundamentals

Market Cap PZG : $96.08M ERAS : $6.30B
EPS PZG : -$0.08 ERAS : -$0.95
PB Ratio PZG : 2.64 ERAS : 14.04
Total Revenue (TTM) PZG : $0.00 ERAS : $0.00
Gross Profit (TTM) PZG : -$892.14K ERAS : -$743.00K
EBITDA (TTM) PZG : -$11.01M ERAS : -$279.47M

Return for Risk

PZG vs. ERAS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

PZG

PZG Risk / Return Rank: 74
PZG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
PZG Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
PZG Omega Ratio Rank: 74
PZG Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
PZG Martin Ratio Rank: 68

ERAS

ERAS Risk / Return Rank: 99
ERAS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
ERAS Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
ERAS Omega Ratio Rank: 99
ERAS Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
ERAS Martin Ratio Rank: 100

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

PZG vs. ERAS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Paramount Gold Nevada Corp. (PZG) and Erasca, Inc. (ERAS). 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.

	PZG	ERAS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.08	11.46	-10.38
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.91	5.02	-3.11
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.82	-0.60
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.33	20.11	-18.78
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.57	59.39	-56.82

PZG vs. ERAS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PZG Sharpe Ratio is 1.08, which is lower than the ERAS Sharpe Ratio of 11.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PZG and ERAS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

PZG vs. ERAS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PZG drawdown since its inception was -93.81%, roughly equal to the maximum ERAS drawdown of -95.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PZG and ERAS.

Drawdown Indicators

	PZG	ERAS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-93.81%	-95.65%	+1.84%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-60.30%	-59.46%	-0.84%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-60.30%	-67.68%	+7.38%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-70.73%	-95.65%	+24.92%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-88.08%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-74.66%	-25.43%	-49.23%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-68.60%	-73.43%	+4.83%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	31.12%	20.10%	+11.02%

Volatility

PZG vs. ERAS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Paramount Gold Nevada Corp. (PZG) is 19.46%, while Erasca, Inc. (ERAS) has a volatility of 20.49%. This indicates that PZG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ERAS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PZG	ERAS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	19.46%	20.49%	-1.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	56.01%	86.24%	-30.23%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	74.21%	104.83%	-30.62%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	63.58%	83.41%	-19.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	60.34%	83.32%	-22.98%

Dividends

PZG vs. ERAS - Dividend Comparison

Neither PZG nor ERAS has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Financials

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PZG and ERAS in my portfolio?

PZG and ERAS have a correlation of 0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PZG or ERAS?

ERAS has higher volatility (20.49%) compared to PZG (19.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PZG dropped -93.81% vs ERAS's -95.65%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ERAS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.46 vs 1.08), 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.