PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
WULF vs. CANG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends
Financials

Performance

WULF vs. CANG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in TeraWulf Inc. (WULF) and Cango Inc. (CANG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, WULF achieves a 125.07% return, which is significantly higher than CANG's -78.00% return.


WULF

1D
7.75%
1M
10.56%
YTD
125.07%
6M
72.86%
1Y
494.48%
3Y*
168.90%
5Y*
22.83%
10Y*
10.67%

CANG

1D
0.30%
1M
-52.24%
YTD
-78.00%
6M
-72.27%
1Y
-87.31%
3Y*
-18.07%
5Y*
-17.24%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

WULF vs. CANG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
WULF
TeraWulf Inc.
125.07%103.00%135.83%260.58%-95.58%77.08%86.34%-36.55%-17.74%
CANG
Cango Inc.
-78.00%-31.82%331.37%-22.02%35.99%-50.19%-19.72%19.71%-36.58%

Correlation

The correlation between WULF and CANG is 0.34, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.34

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

0.24

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

0.19

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 27, 2018

0.13

Over the past year, WULF and CANG have become more correlated (0.34) than their long-term average of 0.13, meaning their price movements have been converging.

Fundamentals

Market Cap

WULF:

$10.94B

CANG:

$118.34M

EPS

WULF:

-$2.55

CANG:

-$10.61

PS Ratio

WULF:

61.90

CANG:

0.05

Total Revenue (TTM)

WULF:

$168.06M

CANG:

$2.32B

Gross Profit (TTM)

WULF:

$107.59M

CANG:

-$783.34M

EBITDA (TTM)

WULF:

-$132.10M

CANG:

-$1.82B

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

WULF vs. CANG — Risk / Return Rank

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

WULF
WULF Risk / Return Rank: 9797
Overall Rank
WULF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9999
Sharpe Ratio Rank
WULF Sortino Ratio Rank: 9696
Sortino Ratio Rank
WULF Omega Ratio Rank: 9494
Omega Ratio Rank
WULF Calmar Ratio Rank: 9999
Calmar Ratio Rank
WULF Martin Ratio Rank: 9999
Martin Ratio Rank

CANG
CANG Risk / Return Rank: 44
Overall Rank
CANG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CANG Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
Sortino Ratio Rank
CANG Omega Ratio Rank: 33
Omega Ratio Rank
CANG Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
Calmar Ratio Rank
CANG Martin Ratio Rank: 33
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.

WULF vs. CANG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TeraWulf Inc. (WULF) and Cango Inc. (CANG). 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.


WULFCANGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+5.58

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+6.40

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.51

0.76

+0.75

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

15.71

-0.99

+16.71

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

41.48

-1.64

+43.12

WULF vs. CANG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WULF Sharpe Ratio is 4.72, which is higher than the CANG Sharpe Ratio of -0.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WULF and CANG, 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


WULFCANGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.72

-0.86

+5.58

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.18

-0.21

+0.39

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.11

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.11

-0.22

+0.33

Drawdowns

WULF vs. CANG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WULF drawdown since its inception was -98.50%, which is greater than CANG's maximum drawdown of -91.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WULF and CANG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


WULFCANGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-98.50%

-91.77%

-6.73%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-31.74%

-88.04%

+56.30%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-75.77%

-91.77%

+16.00%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-98.50%

-91.78%

-6.72%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-98.50%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-28.31%

-91.75%

+63.44%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-46.67%

-59.79%

+13.12%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

12.00%

53.31%

-41.31%

Volatility

WULF vs. CANG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for TeraWulf Inc. (WULF) is 21.75%, while Cango Inc. (CANG) has a volatility of 39.70%. This indicates that WULF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CANG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


WULFCANGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

21.75%

39.70%

-17.95%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

64.60%

90.51%

-25.91%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

105.83%

102.07%

+3.76%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

127.48%

82.80%

+44.68%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

101.40%

83.81%

+17.59%

Dividends

WULF vs. CANG - Dividend Comparison

Neither WULF nor CANG has paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
CANG
Cango Inc.
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%229.36%31.85%3.57%2.73%
WULF
TeraWulf Inc.
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%33.22%0.00%0.00%

Financials

WULF vs. CANG - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between TeraWulf Inc. and Cango 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


0.00200.00M400.00M600.00M800.00M1.00B1.20B20222023202420252026
34.01M
702.01M
(WULF) Total Revenue
(CANG) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

Frequently Asked Questions


WULF and CANG have a correlation of 0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CANG has higher volatility (39.70%) compared to WULF (21.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, WULF dropped -98.50% vs CANG's -91.77%.

WULF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.72 vs -0.86), 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 WULF and CANG

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