UFPT vs. CLS
UFPT (UFP Technologies, Inc.) and CLS (Celestica Inc.) are both stocks. UFPT operates in Medical Devices (Healthcare), while CLS operates in Electronic Components (Technology). Over the past 10 years, UFPT returned 26.04%/yr vs 43.16%/yr for CLS. At a 0.16 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
UFPT vs. CLS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, UFPT achieves a 2.11% return, which is significantly lower than CLS's 30.75% return. Over the past 10 years, UFPT has underperformed CLS with an annualized return of 26.04%, while CLS has yielded a comparatively higher 43.16% annualized return.
UFPT
- 1D
- 1.27%
- 1M
- -1.67%
- YTD
- 2.11%
- 6M
- 5.06%
- 1Y
- -4.53%
- 3Y*
- 10.66%
- 5Y*
- 31.64%
- 10Y*
- 26.04%
CLS
- 1D
- 3.98%
- 1M
- 2.92%
- YTD
- 30.75%
- 6M
- 13.42%
- 1Y
- 220.14%
- 3Y*
- 209.55%
- 5Y*
- 114.81%
- 10Y*
- 43.16%
UFPT vs. CLS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
UFPT UFP Technologies, Inc. | 2.11% | -9.19% | 42.12% | 45.93% | 67.79% | 50.77% | -6.07% | 65.15% | 8.06% | 9.23% |
CLS Celestica Inc. | 30.75% | 220.27% | 215.23% | 159.80% | 1.26% | 37.92% | -2.42% | -5.70% | -16.32% | -11.56% |
Correlation
The correlation between UFPT and CLS is 0.05, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.05 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.23 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.25 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.24 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 1998 | 0.16 |
The correlation between UFPT and CLS shifts across timeframes, from 0.05 (1 year) to 0.25 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Fundamentals
UFPT:
$1.77B
CLS:
$44.72B
UFPT:
$8.81
CLS:
$8.28
UFPT:
25.73
CLS:
46.65
UFPT:
0.48
CLS:
0.63
UFPT:
2.90
CLS:
3.24
UFPT:
4.03
CLS:
21.31
UFPT:
$608.85M
CLS:
$13.81B
UFPT:
$172.62M
CLS:
$1.60B
UFPT:
$111.39M
CLS:
$1.32B
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
UFPT vs. CLS — Risk / Return Rank
UFPT
CLS
UFPT vs. CLS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for UFP Technologies, Inc. (UFPT) and Celestica Inc. (CLS). 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.
| UFPT | CLS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -3.17 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.79 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.02 | 1.39 | -0.37 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.15 | 7.58 | -7.73 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.27 | 18.88 | -19.15 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| UFPT | CLS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.10 | 3.06 | -3.17 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.72 | 2.01 | -1.29 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.66 | 0.87 | -0.21 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.16 | 0.27 | -0.11 |
Drawdowns
UFPT vs. CLS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum UFPT drawdown since its inception was -88.53%, smaller than the maximum CLS drawdown of -96.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UFPT and CLS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| UFPT | CLS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -88.53% | -96.93% | +8.40% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -30.69% | -29.24% | -1.45% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -48.31% | -53.96% | +5.65% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -48.31% | -53.96% | +5.65% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -48.31% | -80.60% | +32.29% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -36.75% | -18.18% | -18.57% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -32.24% | -73.36% | +41.12% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 16.77% | 11.72% | +5.05% |
Volatility
UFPT vs. CLS - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for UFP Technologies, Inc. (UFPT) is 9.41%, while Celestica Inc. (CLS) has a volatility of 26.60%. This indicates that UFPT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CLS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| UFPT | CLS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.41% | 26.60% | -17.19% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 30.26% | 55.08% | -24.82% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 43.47% | 72.52% | -29.05% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 44.22% | 57.62% | -13.40% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 39.62% | 49.93% | -10.31% |
Dividends
UFPT vs. CLS - Dividend Comparison
Neither UFPT nor CLS has paid dividends to shareholders.
Financials
UFPT vs. CLS - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between UFP Technologies, Inc. and Celestica 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.
Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities
UFPT vs. CLS - Profitability Comparison
UFPT - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, UFP Technologies, Inc. reported a gross profit of 44.36M and revenue of 154.20M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 28.8%.
CLS - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Celestica Inc. reported a gross profit of 437.20M and revenue of 4.05B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 10.8%.
UFPT - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, UFP Technologies, Inc. reported an operating income of 23.37M and revenue of 154.20M, resulting in an operating margin of 15.2%.
CLS - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Celestica Inc. reported an operating income of 272.10M and revenue of 4.05B, resulting in an operating margin of 6.7%.
UFPT - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, UFP Technologies, Inc. reported a net income of 17.50M and revenue of 154.20M, resulting in a net margin of 11.4%.
CLS - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Celestica Inc. reported a net income of 212.30M and revenue of 4.05B, resulting in a net margin of 5.3%.
Frequently Asked Questions
UFPT and CLS have a correlation of 0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CLS has higher volatility (26.60%) compared to UFPT (9.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UFPT dropped -88.53% vs CLS's -96.93%.
CLS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.06 vs -0.10), 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.
Find the right allocation for UFPT and CLS
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