SOUN vs. CLF

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

SOUN (SoundHound AI, Inc.) and CLF (Cleveland-Cliffs Inc.) are both stocks. SOUN operates in Software - Application (Technology), while CLF operates in Steel (Basic Materials). Over the past 3 years, SOUN returned 29.87%/yr vs -6.24%/yr for CLF. At a 0.23 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

SOUN vs. CLF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SoundHound AI, Inc. (SOUN) and Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. (CLF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SOUN achieves a -30.79% return, which is significantly lower than CLF's 3.77% return.

SOUN

• 1D: -1.43%
• 1M: -18.05%
• YTD: -30.79%
• 6M: -40.77%
• 1Y: -27.14%
• 3Y*: 29.87%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CLF

• 1D: 0.51%
• 1M: 25.39%
• YTD: 3.77%
• 6M: 8.42%
• 1Y: 91.92%
• 3Y*: -6.24%
• 5Y*: -10.83%
• 10Y*: 11.73%

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

SOUN vs. CLF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
SOUN SoundHound AI, Inc.	-30.79%	-49.75%	835.85%	19.77%	-79.70%
CLF Cleveland-Cliffs Inc.	3.77%	41.28%	-53.97%	26.75%	-41.29%

Correlation

The correlation between SOUN and CLF is 0.28, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.28
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.28
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 28, 2022	0.23

Fundamentals

Market Cap SOUN : $2.34B CLF : $7.78B
EPS SOUN : -$0.43 CLF : -$2.37
PS Ratio SOUN : 14.72 CLF : 0.37
PB Ratio SOUN : 5.07 CLF : 1.34
Total Revenue (TTM) SOUN : $183.99M CLF : $18.90B
Gross Profit (TTM) SOUN : $69.84M CLF : -$528.00M
EBITDA (TTM) SOUN : -$124.47M CLF : $134.00M

Return for Risk

SOUN vs. CLF — Risk / Return Rank

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

SOUN

SOUN Risk / Return Rank: 31
SOUN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
SOUN Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
SOUN Omega Ratio Rank: 32
SOUN Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
SOUN Martin Ratio Rank: 32

CLF

CLF Risk / Return Rank: 75
CLF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
CLF Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
CLF Omega Ratio Rank: 76
CLF Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
CLF Martin Ratio Rank: 72

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.

SOUN vs. CLF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SoundHound AI, Inc. (SOUN) and Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. (CLF). 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.

	SOUN	CLF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.34	1.35	-1.69
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.01	1.91	-1.91
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.00	1.25	-0.25
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.38	1.79	-2.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.60	3.68	-4.28

SOUN vs. CLF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SOUN Sharpe Ratio is -0.34, which is lower than the CLF Sharpe Ratio of 1.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SOUN and CLF, 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

SOUN vs. CLF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SOUN drawdown since its inception was -93.55%, smaller than the maximum CLF drawdown of -98.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SOUN and CLF.

Drawdown Indicators

	SOUN	CLF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-93.55%	-98.78%	+5.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-72.43%	-51.67%	-20.76%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-75.65%	-74.46%	-1.19%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-82.37%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-82.37%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-71.52%	-85.95%	+14.43%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-66.93%	-47.62%	-19.31%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	45.29%	25.06%	+20.23%

Volatility

SOUN vs. CLF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SoundHound AI, Inc. (SOUN) is 17.69%, while Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. (CLF) has a volatility of 22.19%. This indicates that SOUN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CLF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SOUN	CLF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	17.69%	22.19%	-4.50%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	52.15%	47.32%	+4.83%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	80.70%	68.48%	+12.22%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	136.27%	59.28%	+76.99%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	136.27%	62.12%	+74.15%

Dividends

SOUN vs. CLF - Dividend Comparison

Neither SOUN nor CLF has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
CLF Cleveland-Cliffs Inc.	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.82%	3.10%
SOUN SoundHound AI, Inc.	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Financials

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SOUN and CLF in my portfolio?

SOUN and CLF have a correlation of 0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SOUN or CLF?

CLF has higher volatility (22.19%) compared to SOUN (17.69%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SOUN dropped -93.55% vs CLF's -98.78%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CLF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.35 vs -0.34), 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.