AUR vs. CLS: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison
UpdatedHere’s a clear look at AUR and CLS, 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
With AUR at 10.72 billion USD and CLS at 13.11 billion USD, their market capitalizations sit in the same ballpark.
AUR’s beta of 2.77 points to much larger expected swings compared to CLS’s calmer 1.50, suggesting both higher upside and downside potential.
| Symbol | AUR | CLS |
|---|---|---|
| Company Name | Aurora Innovation, Inc. | Celestica Inc. |
| Country | US | CA |
| Sector | Technology | Technology |
| Industry | Information Technology Services | Hardware, Equipment & Parts |
| CEO | Mr. Christopher Urmson Ph.D. | Mr. Robert Andrew Mionis |
| Price | 6.06 USD | 114.03 USD |
| Market Cap | 10.72 billion USD | 13.11 billion USD |
| Beta | 2.77 | 1.50 |
| Exchange | NASDAQ | NYSE |
| IPO Date | May 10, 2021 | June 30, 1998 |
| ADR | No | No |
Performance Comparison
This chart compares the performance of AUR and CLS 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 AUR and CLS based on earnings, cash flow, sales, and book value. Pay attention to the following notable points where extreme values stand out.
- AUR posts a negative P/E of -13.36, reflecting last year’s net loss, while CLS at 32.04 signals healthy earnings.
- AUR has a negative Price-to-Free Cash Flow ratio of -16.83, signaling it consumed more cash than it produced over the last year—an important liquidity warning. In contrast, CLS (P/FCF 37.19) indicates positive free cash flow generation.
| Symbol | AUR | CLS |
|---|---|---|
| Price-to-Earnings Ratio (P/E, TTM) | -13.36 | 32.04 |
| Forward PEG Ratio (TTM) | 0.51 | 1.64 |
| Price-to-Sales Ratio (P/S, TTM) | 0.00 | 1.30 |
| Price-to-Book Ratio (P/B, TTM) | 5.92 | 8.49 |
| Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (P/FCF, TTM) | -16.83 | 37.19 |
| EV-to-EBITDA (TTM) | -13.53 | 18.97 |
| EV-to-Sales (TTM) | 0.00 | 1.36 |
| EV-to-Free Cash Flow (TTM) | -16.74 | 39.00 |
Dividend Comparison
Neither AUR nor CLS 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 | AUR | CLS |
|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield (TTM) | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Financial Strength Metrics Comparison
This section dives into the financial resilience of AUR and CLS, spotlighting key metrics like liquidity, leverage, and debt coverage. Check out the standout observations below where notable differences or extremes pop up.
- AUR shows “--” for interest coverage, hinting at negligible interest costs, whereas CLS (at 12.39) covers its interest obligations.
| Symbol | AUR | CLS |
|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio (TTM) | 9.54 | 1.43 |
| Quick Ratio (TTM) | 9.54 | 0.85 |
| Debt-to-Equity Ratio (TTM) | 0.06 | 0.60 |
| Debt-to-Assets Ratio (TTM) | 0.06 | 0.16 |
| Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) | -- | 12.39 |