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

Performance

TUSK vs. RLGT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. (TUSK) and Radiant Logistics, Inc. (RLGT). 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 77.84% return, which is significantly higher than RLGT's 45.34% return.


TUSK

1D
3.13%
1M
2.81%
YTD
77.84%
6M
85.88%
1Y
21.85%
3Y*
-10.70%
5Y*
-3.15%
10Y*

RLGT

1D
1.10%
1M
10.98%
YTD
45.34%
6M
37.72%
1Y
54.88%
3Y*
11.32%
5Y*
4.51%
10Y*
10.53%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

TUSK vs. RLGT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
TUSK
Mammoth Energy Services, Inc.
77.84%-38.33%-32.74%-48.44%375.27%-59.10%102.27%-87.59%-7.67%29.14%
RLGT
Radiant Logistics, Inc.
45.34%-5.52%0.90%30.45%-30.18%25.69%4.13%31.06%-7.61%17.95%

Correlation

The correlation between TUSK and RLGT is 0.19, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.19

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

0.28

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

0.21

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 14, 2016

0.20

Fundamentals

Market Cap

TUSK:

$159.01M

RLGT:

$446.58M

EPS

TUSK:

-$1.47

RLGT:

$0.33

PS Ratio

TUSK:

2.54

RLGT:

0.50

PB Ratio

TUSK:

0.60

RLGT:

1.91

Total Revenue (TTM)

TUSK:

$62.70M

RLGT:

$893.50M

Gross Profit (TTM)

TUSK:

$9.65M

RLGT:

$113.69M

EBITDA (TTM)

TUSK:

-$14.10M

RLGT:

$27.72M

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. RLGT — Risk / Return Rank

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

TUSK
TUSK Risk / Return Rank: 5353
Overall Rank
TUSK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5353
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TUSK Sortino Ratio Rank: 5454
Sortino Ratio Rank
TUSK Omega Ratio Rank: 5353
Omega Ratio Rank
TUSK Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
TUSK Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank

RLGT
RLGT Risk / Return Rank: 8080
Overall Rank
RLGT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RLGT Sortino Ratio Rank: 7777
Sortino Ratio Rank
RLGT Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
RLGT Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
RLGT Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
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. RLGT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. (TUSK) and Radiant Logistics, Inc. (RLGT). 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.


TUSKRLGTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.11

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.10

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.11

1.27

-0.16

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.41

3.01

-2.60

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.74

6.51

-5.77

TUSK vs. RLGT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TUSK Sharpe Ratio is 0.26, which is lower than the RLGT Sharpe Ratio of 1.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TUSK and RLGT, 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...

Drawdowns

TUSK vs. RLGT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TUSK drawdown since its inception was -98.55%, which is greater than RLGT's maximum drawdown of -92.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TUSK and RLGT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


TUSKRLGTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-98.55%

-92.68%

-5.87%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-42.52%

-17.44%

-25.08%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-69.27%

-36.53%

-32.74%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-80.00%

-43.29%

-36.71%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-56.67%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-91.77%

0.00%

-91.77%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-73.03%

-32.86%

-40.17%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

23.68%

8.06%

+15.62%

Volatility

TUSK vs. RLGT - Volatility Comparison

Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. (TUSK) has a higher volatility of 22.47% compared to Radiant Logistics, Inc. (RLGT) at 7.86%. This indicates that TUSK's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RLGT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


TUSKRLGTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

22.47%

7.86%

+14.61%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

55.18%

31.32%

+23.86%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

66.95%

38.41%

+28.54%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

72.68%

38.48%

+34.20%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

87.23%

44.12%

+43.11%

Dividends

TUSK vs. RLGT - Dividend Comparison

Neither TUSK nor RLGT has paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
RLGT
Radiant Logistics, Inc.
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
TUSK
Mammoth Energy Services, Inc.
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%11.36%1.39%

Financials

TUSK vs. RLGT - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. and Radiant Logistics, Inc.. 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


0.00100.00M200.00M300.00M400.00M20222023202420252026
22.03M
214.14M
(TUSK) Total Revenue
(RLGT) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

TUSK vs. RLGT - Profitability Comparison

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

Gross Margin
Operating Margin
Net Margin
Quarterly
Annual

-40.0%-20.0%0.0%20.0%40.0%60.0%80.0%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%.

RLGT - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Radiant Logistics, Inc. reported a gross profit of 0.00 and revenue of 214.14M. 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%.

RLGT - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Radiant Logistics, Inc. reported an operating income of 6.55M and revenue of 214.14M, resulting in an operating margin of 3.1%.

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%.

RLGT - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Radiant Logistics, Inc. reported a net income of 4.67M and revenue of 214.14M, resulting in a net margin of 2.2%.


Frequently Asked Questions


TUSK and RLGT have a correlation of 0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

TUSK has higher volatility (22.47%) compared to RLGT (7.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TUSK dropped -98.55% vs RLGT's -92.68%.

RLGT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.37 vs 0.26), 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 RLGT

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