APH vs. CLSK: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison
UpdatedHere’s a clear look at APH 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
APH dominates in value with a market cap of 103.65 billion USD, eclipsing CLSK’s 2.84 billion USD by roughly 36.49×.
CLSK carries a higher beta at 4.37, indicating it’s more sensitive to market moves, while APH remains steadier at 1.10.
| Symbol | APH | CLSK |
|---|---|---|
| Company Name | Amphenol Corporation | CleanSpark, Inc. |
| Country | US | US |
| Sector | Technology | Technology |
| Industry | Hardware, Equipment & Parts | Software - Application |
| CEO | Mr. Richard Adam Norwitt J.D. | Mr. Zachary K. Bradford CPA |
| Price | 85.69 USD | 10.11 USD |
| Market Cap | 103.65 billion USD | 2.84 billion USD |
| Beta | 1.10 | 4.37 |
| Exchange | NYSE | NASDAQ |
| IPO Date | November 8, 1991 | November 16, 2016 |
| ADR | No | No |
Performance Comparison
This chart compares the performance of APH 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 APH and CLSK based on earnings, cash flow, sales, and book value. Pay attention to the following notable points where extreme values stand out.
- CLSK shows a negative P/E of -15.82, highlighting a year of losses, whereas APH at 39.67 trades on solid profitability.
- CLSK shows a negative forward PEG of -0.10, signaling expected earnings contraction, while APH at 4.24 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 APH at 46.62 maintains positive cash flow.
| Symbol | APH | CLSK |
|---|---|---|
| Price-to-Earnings Ratio (P/E, TTM) | 39.67 | -15.82 |
| Forward PEG Ratio (TTM) | 4.24 | -0.10 |
| Price-to-Sales Ratio (P/S, TTM) | 6.18 | 5.29 |
| Price-to-Book Ratio (P/B, TTM) | 10.06 | 1.59 |
| Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (P/FCF, TTM) | 46.62 | -2.60 |
| EV-to-EBITDA (TTM) | 25.62 | 60.44 |
| EV-to-Sales (TTM) | 6.51 | 5.11 |
| EV-to-Free Cash Flow (TTM) | 49.10 | -2.52 |
Dividend Comparison
APH delivers a 0.71% dividend yield, blending income with growth, whereas CLSK appears to retain its profits, possibly to fund operations, R&D, or other growth initiatives.
| Symbol | APH | CLSK |
|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield (TTM) | 0.71% | 0.00% |
Financial Strength Metrics Comparison
This section dives into the financial resilience of APH and CLSK, spotlighting key metrics like liquidity, leverage, and debt coverage. Check out the standout observations below where notable differences or extremes pop up.
- APH meets its interest obligations (ratio 13.97). In stark contrast, CLSK’s negative ratio (-144.91) means its operating earnings (EBIT) don't cover basic operations, let alone interest, signaling serious financial trouble.
| Symbol | APH | CLSK |
|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio (TTM) | 1.99 | 8.67 |
| Quick Ratio (TTM) | 1.36 | 8.67 |
| Debt-to-Equity Ratio (TTM) | 0.70 | 0.00 |
| Debt-to-Assets Ratio (TTM) | 0.31 | 0.00 |
| Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) | 13.97 | -144.91 |