SANM vs. CLS.TO

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Sanmina Corporation (SANM) and Celestica Inc. (CLS.TO).

Performance

SANM vs. CLS.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Sanmina Corporation (SANM) and Celestica Inc. (CLS.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

SANM vs. CLS.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
SANM Sanmina Corporation	-13.61%	98.32%	47.30%	-10.33%	38.18%	30.01%	-6.86%	42.31%	-27.09%	-9.96%
CLS.TO Celestica Inc.	-4.58%	220.72%	214.82%	160.12%	0.99%	38.31%	-2.73%	-5.45%	-16.30%	-11.44%

Different Trading Currencies

SANM is traded in USD, while CLS.TO is traded in CAD. To make them comparable, the CLS.TO values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Fundamentals

Market Cap SANM : $7.20B CLS.TO : CA$45.48B
EPS SANM : $4.20 CLS.TO : CA$7.19
PE Ratio SANM : 30.88 CLS.TO : 54.56
PEG Ratio SANM : 6.75 CLS.TO : 0.73
PS Ratio SANM : 0.76 CLS.TO : 3.66
PB Ratio SANM : 0.99 CLS.TO : 20.56
Total Revenue (TTM) SANM : $9.31B CLS.TO : CA$12.41B
Gross Profit (TTM) SANM : $790.80M CLS.TO : CA$1.44B
EBITDA (TTM) SANM : $429.31M CLS.TO : CA$1.21B

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SANM achieves a -13.61% return, which is significantly lower than CLS.TO's -4.58% return. Over the past 10 years, SANM has underperformed CLS.TO with an annualized return of 18.71%, while CLS.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 38.32% annualized return.

SANM

• 1D: 4.52%
• 1M: -16.50%
• YTD: -13.61%
• 6M: 12.62%
• 1Y: 70.18%
• 3Y*: 28.58%
• 5Y*: 25.20%
• 10Y*: 18.71%

CLS.TO

• 1D: 9.62%
• 1M: 1.67%
• YTD: -4.58%
• 6M: 14.73%
• 1Y: 257.64%
• 3Y*: 179.73%
• 5Y*: 100.49%
• 10Y*: 38.32%

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

Return for Risk

SANM vs. CLS.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

SANM

SANM Risk / Return Rank: 77
SANM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
SANM Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
SANM Omega Ratio Rank: 77
SANM Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
SANM Martin Ratio Rank: 80

CLS.TO

CLS.TO Risk / Return Rank: 95
CLS.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
CLS.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
CLS.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 93
CLS.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
CLS.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 97

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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Sanmina Corporation (SANM) 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.

	SANM	CLS.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.09	3.63	-2.54
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.77	3.29	-1.52
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.45	-0.19
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.11	8.34	-6.22
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	5.71	22.02	-16.30
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SANM vs. CLS.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SANM Sharpe Ratio is 1.09, which is lower than the CLS.TO Sharpe Ratio of 3.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SANM and CLS.TO, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	SANM	CLS.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.09	3.63	-2.54
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.59	1.82	-1.22
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.46	0.79	-0.33
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.16	0.67	-0.51

Correlation

The correlation between SANM and CLS.TO is 0.51, 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

SANM vs. CLS.TO - Dividend Comparison

Neither SANM nor CLS.TO has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

SANM vs. CLS.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SANM drawdown since its inception was -99.66%, which is greater than CLS.TO's maximum drawdown of -80.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SANM and CLS.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	SANM	CLS.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-99.66%	-97.34%	-2.32%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-32.69%	-31.71%	-0.98%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-33.92%	-54.25%	+20.33%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-55.85%	-79.32%	+23.47%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-63.38%	-21.07%	-42.31%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-71.63%	-76.06%	+4.43%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	12.10%	12.09%	+0.01%

Volatility

SANM vs. CLS.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Sanmina Corporation (SANM) is 17.43%, while Celestica Inc. (CLS.TO) has a volatility of 23.70%. This indicates that SANM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CLS.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SANM	CLS.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	17.43%	23.70%	-6.27%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	54.34%	54.20%	+0.14%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	64.71%	71.59%	-6.88%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	42.63%	55.70%	-13.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	41.19%	48.93%	-7.74%

Financials

SANM vs. CLS.TO - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Sanmina Corporation and Celestica Inc. over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

SANM - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Sanmina Corporation reported a gross profit of 242.36M and revenue of 3.19B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 7.6%.

CLS.TO - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Celestica Inc. reported a gross profit of 427.57M and revenue of 3.71B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 11.5%.

SANM - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Sanmina Corporation reported an operating income of 73.60M and revenue of 3.19B, resulting in an operating margin of 2.3%.

CLS.TO - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Celestica Inc. reported an operating income of 325.73M and revenue of 3.71B, resulting in an operating margin of 8.8%.

SANM - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Sanmina Corporation reported a net income of 49.29M and revenue of 3.19B, resulting in a net margin of 1.6%.

CLS.TO - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Celestica Inc. reported a net income of 271.61M and revenue of 3.71B, resulting in a net margin of 7.3%.