PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
TUSK vs. FF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends
Financials

Performance

TUSK vs. FF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. (TUSK) and FutureFuel Corp. (FF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TUSK achieves a 92.97% return, which is significantly higher than FF's 35.75% return.


TUSK

1D
0.56%
1M
40.55%
YTD
92.97%
6M
66.05%
1Y
33.71%
3Y*
-2.82%
5Y*
-1.85%
10Y*

FF

1D
-0.70%
1M
-12.86%
YTD
35.75%
6M
28.50%
1Y
14.73%
3Y*
-7.33%
5Y*
-6.16%
10Y*
3.14%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

TUSK vs. FF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
TUSK
Mammoth Energy Services, Inc.
92.97%-38.33%-32.74%-48.44%375.27%-59.10%102.27%-87.59%-7.67%29.14%
FF
FutureFuel Corp.
35.75%-35.84%31.03%-22.78%9.85%-26.86%37.61%-20.32%14.46%3.12%

Correlation

The correlation between TUSK and FF is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.29

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.25

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.26

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 17, 2016

0.24

Fundamentals

Market Cap

TUSK:

$172.54M

FF:

$187.99M

EPS

TUSK:

-$1.47

FF:

-$1.19

PS Ratio

TUSK:

2.75

FF:

1.70

PB Ratio

TUSK:

0.66

FF:

1.32

Total Revenue (TTM)

TUSK:

$62.70M

FF:

$110.11M

Gross Profit (TTM)

TUSK:

$9.65M

FF:

-$26.13M

EBITDA (TTM)

TUSK:

-$14.10M

FF:

-$50.17M

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

TUSK vs. FF — Risk / Return Rank

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

TUSK
TUSK Risk / Return Rank: 5858
Overall Rank
TUSK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TUSK Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
TUSK Omega Ratio Rank: 5858
Omega Ratio Rank
TUSK Calmar Ratio Rank: 5858
Calmar Ratio Rank
TUSK Martin Ratio Rank: 5656
Martin Ratio Rank

FF
FF Risk / Return Rank: 5050
Overall Rank
FF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5151
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FF Sortino Ratio Rank: 4848
Sortino Ratio Rank
FF Omega Ratio Rank: 4848
Omega Ratio Rank
FF Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
FF Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

TUSK vs. FF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. (TUSK) and FutureFuel Corp. (FF). 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.


TUSKFFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.22

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.52

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.15

1.10

+0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.80

0.48

+0.32

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.43

1.00

+0.43

TUSK vs. FF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TUSK Sharpe Ratio is 0.52, which is higher than the FF Sharpe Ratio of 0.30. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TUSK and FF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


TUSKFFDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.52

0.30

+0.22

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.03

-0.13

+0.11

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.07

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.14

0.10

-0.25

Drawdowns

TUSK vs. FF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TUSK drawdown since its inception was -98.55%, which is greater than FF's maximum drawdown of -64.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TUSK and FF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


TUSKFFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-98.55%

-64.23%

-34.32%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-42.52%

-30.85%

-11.67%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-69.27%

-51.46%

-17.81%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-80.00%

-51.46%

-28.54%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-64.23%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-91.07%

-49.14%

-41.93%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-73.00%

-30.52%

-42.48%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

23.60%

14.80%

+8.80%

Volatility

TUSK vs. FF - Volatility Comparison

Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. (TUSK) has a higher volatility of 27.19% compared to FutureFuel Corp. (FF) at 20.22%. This indicates that TUSK's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


TUSKFFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

27.19%

20.22%

+6.97%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

56.27%

39.41%

+16.86%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

64.92%

49.82%

+15.10%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

72.31%

46.28%

+26.03%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

87.17%

44.62%

+42.55%

Dividends

TUSK vs. FF - Dividend Comparison

TUSK has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.62%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FF
FutureFuel Corp.
5.62%7.52%51.80%3.95%2.95%35.86%25.51%1.94%1.51%1.70%18.20%1.78%
TUSK
Mammoth Energy Services, Inc.
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%11.36%1.39%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Financials

TUSK vs. FF - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. and FutureFuel Corp.. You can select fields from income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements to easily visualize and compare the financial health of both companies.


Quarterly
Annual

Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities


0.0020.00M40.00M60.00M80.00M100.00M120.00M20222023202420252026
22.03M
31.90M
(TUSK) Total Revenue
(FF) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

TUSK vs. FF - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. and FutureFuel Corp. over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

Gross Margin
Operating Margin
Net Margin
Quarterly
Annual

-100.0%-50.0%0.0%50.0%20222023202420252026
71.6%
0
Portfolio components
TUSK - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. reported a gross profit of 15.78M and revenue of 22.03M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 71.6%.

FF - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, FutureFuel Corp. reported a gross profit of 0.00 and revenue of 31.90M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 0.0%.

TUSK - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. reported an operating income of 4.68M and revenue of 22.03M, resulting in an operating margin of 21.3%.

FF - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, FutureFuel Corp. reported an operating income of -20.84M and revenue of 31.90M, resulting in an operating margin of -65.3%.

TUSK - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. reported a net income of 5.19M and revenue of 22.03M, resulting in a net margin of 23.6%.

FF - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, FutureFuel Corp. reported a net income of -20.58M and revenue of 31.90M, resulting in a net margin of -64.5%.


Frequently Asked Questions


TUSK and FF have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

TUSK has higher volatility (27.19%) compared to FF (20.22%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TUSK dropped -98.55% vs FF's -64.23%.

TUSK currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.52 vs 0.30), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for TUSK and FF

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer