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

Performance

WULF vs. CIFR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in TeraWulf Inc. (WULF) and Cipher Digital Inc. (CIFR). 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 150.48% return, which is significantly higher than CIFR's 87.26% return.


WULF

1D
1.66%
1M
26.12%
YTD
150.48%
6M
131.72%
1Y
706.16%
3Y*
151.93%
5Y*
10Y*

CIFR

1D
-1.78%
1M
25.81%
YTD
87.26%
6M
73.73%
1Y
683.00%
3Y*
112.02%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

WULF vs. CIFR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
WULF
TeraWulf Inc.
150.48%103.00%135.83%260.58%-95.58%-52.66%
CIFR
Cipher Digital Inc.
87.26%218.10%12.35%637.50%-87.90%-7.58%

Correlation

The correlation between WULF and CIFR is 0.78, 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

0.78

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

0.73

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 14, 2021

0.62

The correlation between WULF and CIFR shifts across timeframes, from 0.62 (all time) to 0.78 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Fundamentals

Market Cap

WULF:

$12.17B

CIFR:

$11.20B

EPS

WULF:

-$2.55

CIFR:

-$2.33

PS Ratio

WULF:

68.89

CIFR:

60.74

Total Revenue (TTM)

WULF:

$168.06M

CIFR:

$174.98M

Gross Profit (TTM)

WULF:

$107.59M

CIFR:

-$172.84M

EBITDA (TTM)

WULF:

-$132.10M

CIFR:

-$169.22M

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. CIFR — Risk / Return Rank

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

WULF
WULF Risk / Return Rank: 9898
Overall Rank
WULF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9999
Sharpe Ratio Rank
WULF Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
WULF Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
WULF Calmar Ratio Rank: 9999
Calmar Ratio Rank
WULF Martin Ratio Rank: 9999
Martin Ratio Rank

CIFR
CIFR Risk / Return Rank: 9797
Overall Rank
CIFR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9999
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CIFR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9696
Sortino Ratio Rank
CIFR Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
CIFR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
CIFR Martin Ratio Rank: 9797
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. CIFR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TeraWulf Inc. (WULF) and Cipher Digital Inc. (CIFR). 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.


WULFCIFRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.44

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.68

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.60

1.50

+0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

22.46

13.42

+9.04

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

60.68

26.92

+33.76

WULF vs. CIFR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WULF Sharpe Ratio is 6.76, which is comparable to the CIFR Sharpe Ratio of 6.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WULF and CIFR, 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

WULF vs. CIFR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WULF drawdown since its inception was -98.30%, roughly equal to the maximum CIFR drawdown of -97.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WULF and CIFR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


WULFCIFRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-98.30%

-97.16%

-1.14%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-31.74%

-51.38%

+19.64%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-75.77%

-71.74%

-4.03%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-9.47%

-5.28%

-4.19%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-81.54%

-65.92%

-15.62%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

11.72%

25.56%

-13.84%

Volatility

WULF vs. CIFR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for TeraWulf Inc. (WULF) is 23.30%, while Cipher Digital Inc. (CIFR) has a volatility of 29.06%. This indicates that WULF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CIFR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


WULFCIFRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

23.30%

29.06%

-5.76%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

62.43%

70.62%

-8.19%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

105.58%

109.32%

-3.74%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

127.65%

121.80%

+5.85%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

127.65%

121.80%

+5.85%

Dividends

WULF vs. CIFR - Dividend Comparison

Neither WULF nor CIFR has paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
CIFR
Cipher Digital Inc.
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
WULF
TeraWulf Inc.
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%33.22%

Financials

WULF vs. CIFR - Financials Comparison

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


0.0020.00M40.00M60.00M80.00M20222023202420252026
34.01M
0
(WULF) Total Revenue
(CIFR) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

Frequently Asked Questions


WULF and CIFR have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CIFR has higher volatility (29.06%) compared to WULF (23.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, WULF dropped -98.30% vs CIFR's -97.16%.

WULF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (6.76 vs 6.32), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for WULF and CIFR

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