ALAB vs. CLSK: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison
UpdatedHere’s a clear look at ALAB and CLSK, comparing key factors like performance, valuation metrics, dividends, and financial strength. It’s built for investors or anyone curious to see how these two stocks match up.
Company Overview
ALAB dominates in value with a market cap of 15.20 billion USD, eclipsing CLSK’s 2.84 billion USD by roughly 5.35×.
CLSK carries a higher beta at 4.37, indicating it’s more sensitive to market moves, while ALAB remains steadier at 0.33.
| Symbol | ALAB | CLSK |
|---|---|---|
| Company Name | Astera Labs, Inc. Common Stock | CleanSpark, Inc. |
| Country | US | US |
| Sector | Technology | Technology |
| Industry | Semiconductors | Software - Application |
| CEO | Mr. Jitendra Mohan | Mr. Zachary K. Bradford CPA |
| Price | 92.17 USD | 10.11 USD |
| Market Cap | 15.20 billion USD | 2.84 billion USD |
| Beta | 0.33 | 4.37 |
| Exchange | NASDAQ | NASDAQ |
| IPO Date | March 20, 2024 | November 16, 2016 |
| ADR | No | No |
Performance Comparison
This chart compares the performance of ALAB and CLSK over the past year by tracking the growth of an initial $10,000 investment in each (starting one year ago).
Hover over the lines to see the investment’s value and total return (%) at specific dates.
Data is adjusted for dividends and splits.
Valuation Metrics Comparison
The section examines key financial ratios to assess the valuation of ALAB and CLSK based on earnings, cash flow, sales, and book value. Pay attention to the following notable points where extreme values stand out.
- ALAB trades at a lofty P/E of 363.38, implying strong growth expectations, in contrast to CLSK’s negative P/E of -15.82 driven by recent losses.
- CLSK shows a negative forward PEG of -0.10, signaling expected earnings contraction, while ALAB at 10.90 maintains analysts’ projections for stable or improved profits.
- CLSK reports a negative Price-to-Free Cash Flow ratio of -2.60, showing a cash flow shortfall that could threaten its operational sustainability, while ALAB at 140.53 maintains positive cash flow.
| Symbol | ALAB | CLSK |
|---|---|---|
| Price-to-Earnings Ratio (P/E, TTM) | 363.38 | -15.82 |
| Forward PEG Ratio (TTM) | 10.90 | -0.10 |
| Price-to-Sales Ratio (P/S, TTM) | 30.99 | 5.29 |
| Price-to-Book Ratio (P/B, TTM) | 14.44 | 1.59 |
| Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (P/FCF, TTM) | 140.53 | -2.60 |
| EV-to-EBITDA (TTM) | -832.77 | 60.44 |
| EV-to-Sales (TTM) | 30.81 | 5.11 |
| EV-to-Free Cash Flow (TTM) | 139.73 | -2.52 |
Dividend Comparison
Neither ALAB nor CLSK currently pays a dividend yield; this often indicates they are reinvesting earnings for growth, prioritizing long-term expansion over immediate cash returns to shareholders.
| Symbol | ALAB | CLSK |
|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield (TTM) | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Financial Strength Metrics Comparison
This section dives into the financial resilience of ALAB and CLSK, spotlighting key metrics like liquidity, leverage, and debt coverage. Check out the standout observations below where notable differences or extremes pop up.
- ALAB shows “--” (minimal interest expense), but CLSK is in the red with interest coverage -144.91, signaling a net operating loss.
| Symbol | ALAB | CLSK |
|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio (TTM) | 13.92 | 8.67 |
| Quick Ratio (TTM) | 13.26 | 8.67 |
| Debt-to-Equity Ratio (TTM) | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Debt-to-Assets Ratio (TTM) | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) | -- | -144.91 |