QS vs. LAC

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

QS (QuantumScape Corporation) and LAC (Lithium Americas Corp.) are both stocks. QS operates in Auto Parts (Consumer Cyclical), while LAC operates in Other Industrial Metals & Mining (Basic Materials). Over the past year, QS returned 85.47% vs 68.89% for LAC. At a 0.50 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

QS vs. LAC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in QuantumScape Corporation (QS) and Lithium Americas Corp. (LAC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QS achieves a -26.49% return, which is significantly lower than LAC's 4.59% return.

QS

• 1D: -0.13%
• 1M: 1.59%
• YTD: -26.49%
• 6M: -39.21%
• 1Y: 85.47%
• 3Y*: 6.73%
• 5Y*: -24.41%
• 10Y*: —

LAC

• 1D: 0.66%
• 1M: -18.13%
• YTD: 4.59%
• 6M: -14.12%
• 1Y: 68.89%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QS vs. LAC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
QS QuantumScape Corporation	-26.49%	100.77%	-25.32%	3.89%
LAC Lithium Americas Corp.	4.59%	46.80%	-53.59%	-27.19%

Correlation

The correlation between QS and LAC is 0.55, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.55
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 2, 2023	0.50

The correlation between QS and LAC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.50 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.

Fundamentals

Market Cap QS : $4.68B LAC : $1.61B
EPS QS : -$0.72 LAC : -$0.28
PB Ratio QS : 4.22 LAC : 1.19
Total Revenue (TTM) QS : $0.00 LAC : $0.00
Gross Profit (TTM) QS : -$49.03M LAC : -$580.22K
EBITDA (TTM) QS : -$378.92M LAC : -$52.10M

Return for Risk

QS vs. LAC — Risk / Return Rank

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

QS

QS Risk / Return Rank: 69
QS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
QS Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
QS Omega Ratio Rank: 71
QS Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
QS Martin Ratio Rank: 61

LAC

LAC Risk / Return Rank: 68
LAC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
LAC Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
LAC Omega Ratio Rank: 74
LAC Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
LAC Martin Ratio Rank: 59

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.

QS vs. LAC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for QuantumScape Corporation (QS) and Lithium Americas Corp. (LAC). 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.

	QS	LAC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.83	0.53	+0.31
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.93	2.16	-0.24
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.25	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.27	1.10	+0.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.00	1.69	+0.31
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QS vs. LAC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QS Sharpe Ratio is 0.83, which is higher than the LAC Sharpe Ratio of 0.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QS and LAC, 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

	QS	LAC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.83	0.53	+0.31
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.29	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.04	-0.26	+0.21

Drawdowns

QS vs. LAC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QS drawdown since its inception was -97.36%, which is greater than LAC's maximum drawdown of -81.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QS and LAC.

Drawdown Indicators

	QS	LAC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-97.36%	-81.83%	-15.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-67.68%	-63.08%	-4.60%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-73.93%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-91.45%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-94.18%	-61.09%	-33.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-85.55%	-63.22%	-22.33%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	42.96%	40.87%	+2.09%

Volatility

QS vs. LAC - Volatility Comparison

QuantumScape Corporation (QS) has a higher volatility of 26.40% compared to Lithium Americas Corp. (LAC) at 21.31%. This indicates that QS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LAC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QS	LAC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	26.40%	21.31%	+5.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	48.57%	52.78%	-4.21%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	103.45%	132.10%	-28.65%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	85.88%	101.33%	-15.45%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	106.01%	101.33%	+4.68%

Dividends

QS vs. LAC - Dividend Comparison

Neither QS nor LAC has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Financials

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QS and LAC in my portfolio?

QS and LAC have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QS or LAC?

QS has higher volatility (26.40%) compared to LAC (21.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QS dropped -97.36% vs LAC's -81.83%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.83 vs 0.53), 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.