WFC vs. MS
WFC (Wells Fargo & Company) and MS (Morgan Stanley) are both stocks. Both are in the Financial Services sector — WFC in Banks - Diversified, MS in Capital Markets. Over the past 10 years, WFC returned 8.26%/yr vs 27.13%/yr for MS. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined.
Performance
WFC vs. MS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, WFC achieves a -12.21% return, which is significantly lower than MS's 20.86% return. Over the past 10 years, WFC has underperformed MS with an annualized return of 8.26%, while MS has yielded a comparatively higher 27.13% annualized return.
WFC
- 1D
- -1.20%
- 1M
- 7.03%
- YTD
- -12.21%
- 6M
- -9.15%
- 1Y
- 8.39%
- 3Y*
- 27.47%
- 5Y*
- 14.74%
- 10Y*
- 8.26%
MS
- 1D
- 0.15%
- 1M
- 9.92%
- YTD
- 20.86%
- 6M
- 21.34%
- 1Y
- 64.89%
- 3Y*
- 39.40%
- 5Y*
- 21.89%
- 10Y*
- 27.13%
WFC vs. MS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
WFC Wells Fargo & Company | -12.21% | 35.57% | 46.48% | 22.94% | -11.92% | 61.15% | -41.65% | 21.44% | -21.83% | 13.21% |
MS Morgan Stanley | 20.86% | 45.16% | 39.73% | 13.93% | -10.34% | 46.65% | 38.09% | 32.67% | -22.76% | 26.61% |
Correlation
The correlation between WFC and MS is 0.61, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.61 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.67 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.69 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.70 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 23, 1993 | 0.58 |
The correlation between WFC and MS shifts across timeframes, from 0.58 (all time) to 0.70 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Fundamentals
WFC:
$260.48B
MS:
$338.10B
WFC:
$6.73
MS:
$11.41
WFC:
12.03
MS:
18.59
WFC:
1.04
MS:
1.75
WFC:
2.08
MS:
2.81
WFC:
1.60
MS:
3.23
WFC:
$125.70B
MS:
$120.22B
WFC:
$81.14B
MS:
$69.72B
WFC:
$31.58B
MS:
$27.21B
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
WFC vs. MS — Risk / Return Rank
WFC
MS
WFC vs. MS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Wells Fargo & Company (WFC) and Morgan Stanley (MS). 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.
| WFC | MS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.24 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.56 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.08 | 1.43 | -0.35 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.37 | 3.46 | -3.10 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.84 | 11.46 | -10.62 |
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
| WFC | MS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.32 | 2.55 | -2.24 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.49 | 0.77 | -0.28 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.26 | 0.86 | -0.61 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.33 | 0.29 | +0.04 |
Drawdowns
WFC vs. MS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum WFC drawdown since its inception was -79.01%, smaller than the maximum MS drawdown of -88.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WFC and MS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| WFC | MS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -79.01% | -88.12% | +9.11% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -23.02% | -18.83% | -4.19% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.73% | -29.24% | +4.51% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -37.10% | -32.38% | -4.72% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -64.46% | -51.33% | -13.13% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -15.11% | -2.76% | -12.35% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -15.35% | -33.70% | +18.35% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.06% | 5.68% | +4.38% |
Volatility
WFC vs. MS - Volatility Comparison
Wells Fargo & Company (WFC) has a higher volatility of 8.57% compared to Morgan Stanley (MS) at 8.06%. This indicates that WFC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| WFC | MS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.57% | 8.06% | +0.51% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 19.98% | 21.21% | -1.23% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.77% | 25.62% | +1.15% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 30.25% | 28.72% | +1.53% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 32.30% | 31.51% | +0.79% |
Dividends
WFC vs. MS - Dividend Comparison
WFC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.22%, more than MS's 1.88% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MS Morgan Stanley | 1.88% | 2.17% | 2.82% | 3.49% | 3.47% | 2.14% | 2.04% | 2.54% | 2.77% | 1.72% | 1.66% | 1.73% |
WFC Wells Fargo & Company | 2.22% | 1.82% | 2.14% | 2.64% | 2.66% | 1.25% | 4.04% | 3.57% | 3.56% | 2.54% | 2.75% | 2.71% |
Financials
WFC vs. MS - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Wells Fargo & Company and Morgan Stanley. 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
WFC vs. MS - Profitability Comparison
WFC - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Wells Fargo & Company reported a gross profit of 20.31B and revenue of 31.80B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 63.9%.
MS - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Morgan Stanley reported a gross profit of 20.48B and revenue of 33.15B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 61.8%.
WFC - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Wells Fargo & Company reported an operating income of 5.85B and revenue of 31.80B, resulting in an operating margin of 18.4%.
MS - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Morgan Stanley reported an operating income of 7.01B and revenue of 33.15B, resulting in an operating margin of 21.2%.
WFC - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Wells Fargo & Company reported a net income of 5.29B and revenue of 31.80B, resulting in a net margin of 16.6%.
MS - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Morgan Stanley reported a net income of 5.64B and revenue of 33.15B, resulting in a net margin of 17.0%.
Frequently Asked Questions
WFC and MS have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
WFC has higher volatility (8.57%) compared to MS (8.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, WFC dropped -79.01% vs MS's -88.12%.
MS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.55 vs 0.32), 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 WFC and MS
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