CoreWeave vs Applied Digital (CRWV vs APLD) 2026: Stock Returns, Risk & Volatility

Q: Which is a better investment: CRWV or APLD?

Over the past year, APLD looks like the better investment: it had higher total return (APLD +673.4% vs CRWV +182.7%) and a higher Sharpe ratio (APLD 2.25 vs CRWV 1.47). On risk, CRWV was less volatile (CRWV 107.7% vs APLD 119.6%), APLD had a smaller max drawdown (APLD -50.3% vs CRWV -64.8%), and APLD had less severe losses on the worst 5% of days (Expected Shortfall of APLD -12.14% vs CRWV -13.45%).

Written by Gale Finance Team

Reviewed by Sid Kalla CFA Charterholder

Quick answer

Which is a better investment: CRWV or APLD?

Over the past year, APLD outperformed CRWV. APLD returned +673.4% compared with CRWV’s +182.7%. APLD had the better risk-adjusted return, with a Sharpe ratio of 2.25 versus CRWV’s 1.47. CRWV was less volatile than APLD, but APLD had a smaller max drawdown than CRWV.

Total Return

CRWV +182.7%

APLD +673.4%

Sharpe Ratio

CRWV 1.47

APLD 2.25

Annualized Volatility

CRWV 107.7%

APLD 119.6%

Max Drawdown

CRWV -64.8%

APLD -50.3%

Metric winners: Total Return: APLD; Sharpe Ratio: APLD; Annualized Volatility: CRWV (less volatile); Max Drawdown: APLD (smaller drawdown).

CRWV Total Return

↑ +182.7%

APLD Total Return

↑ +673.4%

Relative Performance of CRWV vs APLD (Normalized to 100)

CRWV APLD

Normalized to 100 at start date for comparison

Trade CRWV or APLD

Access these assets on trusted platforms.

Hyperliquid

Trade perpetual futures exposure where supportedCRWVAPLDTrade on Hyperliquid

Binance

Trade futures exposure on a global exchange where supportedCRWVAPLDTrade on Binance

Affiliate disclosure

Key Takeaways

Total Return: CRWV delivered a +182.7% total return, while APLD returned +673.4% over the same period. APLD outperformed on total returns.
Risk-Adjusted Return (Sharpe Ratio): APLD had a higher Sharpe (2.25 vs 1.47), indicating better risk-adjusted performance.
Volatility (Annualized): APLD was more volatile, with 119.6% annualized volatility, versus 107.7% for CRWV.
Maximum Drawdown: APLD's maximum drawdown was -50.3%, while CRWV experienced a deeper drawdown of -64.8%.
Tail Risk (VaR & Expected Shortfall): At the 5% level (daily log returns), CRWV's VaR was -8.82% and its Expected Shortfall (CVaR) was -13.45%; APLD's were -9.57% and -12.14%. VaR is the cutoff; Expected Shortfall is the average move on the worst days.
Skew & Kurtosis: Skew: CRWV 0.15 vs APLD 1.19. Excess kurtosis: CRWV 1.51 vs APLD 4.29. Negative skew leans downside; higher excess kurtosis means fatter tails.
Tail Days & Extremes: 2σ tail days (down/up): CRWV 5/9, APLD 4/8. Worst day: CRWV -20.83% (2025-08-13) vs APLD -17.52% (2025-12-15). Best day: CRWV +25.19% (2025-06-03) vs APLD +48.46% (2025-06-02).
Risk ratios: Sortino - CRWV: 2.42 vs. APLD: 4.58 , Calmar - CRWV: 2.85 vs. APLD: 13.58 , Sterling - CRWV: 5.58 vs. APLD: 24.39 , Treynor - CRWV: 0.49 vs. APLD: 0.81 , Ulcer Index - CRWV: 41.72% vs. APLD: 21.85%

Investment Comparison

If you invested $10,000 in each asset on April 25, 2025:

CRWV $28,266.73 +182.7%

APLD $77,340.43 +673.4%

Difference: $49,073.7 (APLD ahead)

CoreWeave vs Applied Digital Performance Over Time

Metric	CRWV	APLD
30 Days	41.4%	35.7%
90 Days	26.3%	-3.6%
180 Days	-11.4%	8.7%
1 Year	182.7%	673.4%

Shorter time frames can show different leaders as market conditions change. Consider your investment horizon when comparing performance.

CoreWeave vs Applied Digital Correlation

Average Correlation

moderately correlated

0.51

Current (30-day) 0.59

30-day rolling range -0.08 to +0.83

CoreWeave and Applied Digital are moderately correlated over the past year. With a correlation of 0.51, these assets show moderate co-movement, offering some diversification when held together.

For portfolio construction, this moderate correlation offers some diversification benefit, though the assets still tend to move together during major market moves.

Metric	Value
Current (30-day)	0.59
Average (full period)	0.51
Minimum (30-day rolling)	-0.08
Maximum (30-day rolling)	0.83

Correlation measures how closely two assets move together. Values near +1 indicate strong co-movement, near 0 indicates independence, and negative values indicate inverse movement. Current, minimum, and maximum figures are 30-day rolling correlations on shared daily returns.

Drawdown

Maximum Drawdown

CRWV

-64.8%

APLD

-50.3%

CoreWeave experienced its maximum drawdown of -64.8% from 2025-06-20 to 2025-12-17. It has not yet recovered to its previous peak.

Applied Digital experienced its maximum drawdown of -50.3% from 2026-01-27 to 2026-03-30. It has not yet recovered to its previous peak.

Smaller drawdowns and faster recoveries indicate lower downside risk and greater resilience during market stress.

CoreWeave vs Applied Digital Volatility (CRWV vs APLD)

CRWV Volatility

107.7%

±6.78% 1-day vol

APLD Volatility

119.6%

±7.53% 1-day vol

1-day volatility (1σ)

CRWV

±6.78%

APLD

±7.53%

CoreWeave's 107.7% annualized volatility translates to about ±6.78% one-standard-deviation daily volatility.

Applied Digital's 119.6% annualized volatility translates to about ±7.53% one-standard-deviation daily volatility.

APLD had the wider volatility profile over this window. That means its day-to-day return distribution was broader; CRWV was calmer, but lower volatility does not by itself mean better returns.

Treat the ± daily figure as a one-standard-deviation estimate from historical returns, not a forecast or expected absolute daily move. For context, 15-18% annualized volatility is roughly ±1% one-standard-deviation daily volatility.

Risk-adjusted ratios

Sharpe Ratio of CRWV and APLD

Sharpe Ratio: CRWV vs. APLD

Return per total volatility

Sharpe gives us excess return per unit of risk. Upside and downside volatility both count as risk.

Higher is better

excess return / total volatility

Formula

\displaystyle \mathrm{Sharpe} = \frac{\mathbb{E}[R] - R_f}{\sigma_R}

Sharpe ratio measures return per unit of risk (volatility). A higher Sharpe indicates better risk-adjusted performance. APLD had a higher Sharpe (2.25 vs 1.47), indicating better risk-adjusted performance.

A Sharpe above 1.0 is generally considered good, above 2.0 is excellent. Negative Sharpe means the asset underperformed the risk-free rate. Calculated on each asset's full 365-day lookback of available prices and annualized using the asset calendar (365 for crypto, 252 trading days for equities/ETFs/metals).

Sortino Ratio of CRWV and APLD

Sortino Ratio: CRWV vs. APLD

Return per downside volatility

Sortino keeps the return-over-risk idea, but only returns below the target rate count as volatility.

Higher is better

excess return / downside volatility

Formula

\displaystyle \mathrm{Sortino} = \frac{\mathbb{E}[R] - R_f}{\sigma_{\mathrm{down}}}

Sortino ratio measures return per unit of downside risk. Unlike Sharpe, it only counts downside deviation (returns below the target return). APLD had better downside-adjusted returns.

A higher Sortino is better. It's useful when upside volatility is common (crypto is the obvious example). Downside deviation: CRWV 65.2% vs APLD 58.8%. Calculated on each asset's full 365-day lookback of available prices, using the daily risk-free rate as the target return, and annualized using the asset calendar (365 for crypto, 252 trading days for equities/ETFs/metals).

Calmar Ratio of CRWV and APLD

Calmar Ratio: CRWV vs. APLD

CAGR per worst drawdown

Calmar compares CAGR against the single deepest peak-to-trough loss over the period.

Higher is better

CAGR / max drawdown

Formula

\displaystyle \mathrm{Calmar} = \frac{\mathrm{CAGR}}{|\mathrm{MaxDD}|}

Calmar ratio compares CAGR to maximum drawdown. Higher Calmar means more return per unit of worst drawdown. APLD posted the higher Calmar ratio.

Calmar is computed on each asset's full 365-day lookback and uses the max drawdown over that same window.

Sterling Ratio of CRWV and APLD

Sterling Ratio: CRWV vs. APLD

Return per average drawdown

Sterling smooths the drawdown penalty by using average drawdown events instead of only the worst one.

Higher is better

excess annual return / average deep drawdown

Formula

\displaystyle \mathrm{Sterling} = \frac{\mathrm{CAGR} - R_f}{\overline{D}_{>10\%}}

Sterling ratio measures excess return per unit of average drawdown (typically drawdowns worse than 10%). APLD posted the higher Sterling ratio.

Sterling uses average drawdown events deeper than 10% and subtracts the risk-free rate to report excess return.

Treynor Ratio of CRWV and APLD

Treynor Ratio: CRWV vs. APLD

Excess return per market beta

Treynor divides excess annualized return by beta — the sensitivity of the asset to broad-market moves. The slope shown is each asset’s beta vs SPY.

Higher is better

excess return / market beta

Formula

\displaystyle \mathrm{Treynor} = \frac{\mathbb{E}[R] - R_f}{\beta}

Treynor ratio measures excess return per unit of market risk (beta) instead of total volatility. APLD posted the higher Treynor ratio.

Treynor uses beta vs the S&P 500 (SPY) on shared dates and the average 3-month Treasury rate as the risk-free rate.

Ulcer Index of CRWV and APLD

Ulcer Index: CRWV vs. APLD

Drawdown pain

Ulcer Index is a risk index, not a return-over-risk ratio. Lower means smaller and shorter drawdowns.

Lower is better

root-mean-square drawdown

Formula

\displaystyle \mathrm{UI} = \sqrt{\mathbb{E}[D_t^2]}

Ulcer Index captures drawdown depth and duration. Lower Ulcer Index means less drawdown pain. APLD had the lower Ulcer Index (less drawdown pain).

Ulcer Index is computed from each asset's drawdown series over the full lookback window.

Tail Risk & Distribution Shape (1-Year): CoreWeave vs. Applied Digital

This section looks at the shape of daily returns, not just the average. Tail stats are computed per asset on its own daily series (crypto includes weekends). We use daily log returns $\ln\left(\frac{P_t}{P_{t-1}}\right)$ so multi-day moves add cleanly.

Definitions: Value at Risk (VaR), Expected Shortfall, skew, kurtosis, and fat tails.

Tail Risk & Distribution Shape: CRWV vs. APLD (1-Year)

Actual daily return tails

The bars are real daily log-return observations from the article window. Darker bars are observations at or beyond each asset’s 5% VaR cutoff.

Observed returns

VaR marks the 5th percentile loss cutoff; Expected Shortfall averages the observations beyond that cutoff.

Formula

\displaystyle \mathrm{VaR}_{5\%}=Q_{0.05}(r_t),\quad \mathrm{ES}_{5\%}=\mathbb{E}[r_t\mid r_t\le \mathrm{VaR}_{5\%}]

Metric (1-Year)	CRWV	APLD
5% VaR (daily log return)	-8.82%	-9.57%
5% Expected Shortfall (CVaR)	-13.45% (worst 13 days)	-12.14% (worst 13 days)
Skew	0.15	1.19
Excess kurtosis	1.51	4.29
2σ tail days (down / up)	5 / 9	4 / 8
Worst day	-20.83% (2025-08-13)	-17.52% (2025-12-15)
Best day	+25.19% (2025-06-03)	+48.46% (2025-06-02)

Downside co-moves (2σ) — 1-Year

Computed on shared dates only (n=249). A “2σ downside move” means a shared-close log return more than 2 standard deviations below that asset’s own mean on this shared-date series. Dates below show simple returns (%) for readability.

Downside co-move map: CRWV vs. APLD (2σ)

Shared-close daily returns

Dots mark actual downside days: asset-colored dots are one-sided downside moves, and red dots are joint downside days. Grey dots add sampled shared-return context when available. The shaded lower-left zone shows where both CRWV and APLD crossed their own 2σ downside threshold.

2σ

Show downside tail dates

Dates below are shared-date observations. The “Date” is the period end (close). Tail thresholds are computed on log returns, but the table shows simple returns (%) for readability. Returns are computed from the previous shared close to this one (for example, Friday → Monday includes weekend moves).

Days when both CRWV and APLD had a big down day (2σ)

None in this window.

Days when CRWV had a big down day

Date (interval)	CRWV	APLD
2025-06-05	-17.20%	-3.62%
2025-08-13	-20.83%	-1.14%
2025-08-14	-15.50%	-1.69%
2025-11-11	-16.31%	-9.13%
2026-02-27	-18.51%	-4.82%

Days when APLD had a big down day

Date (interval)	CRWV	APLD
2025-11-13	-8.30%	-12.68%
2025-12-12 → 2025-12-15	-7.94%	-17.52%
2026-02-04	-8.44%	-14.06%
2026-03-27 → 2026-03-30	-7.57%	-13.53%

Read this as “how ugly the ugly days get”, not as a precise forecast. One-year samples are small, so tail estimates are inherently noisy.

Full Comparison of CoreWeave vs. Applied Digital (1-Year)

Metric	CRWV	APLD
Total Return	+182.7%	+673.4%
Annualized Volatility	107.7%	119.6%
Sharpe Ratio	1.47	2.25
Sortino Ratio	2.42	4.58
Calmar Ratio	2.85	13.58
Sterling Ratio	5.58	24.39
Treynor Ratio	0.49	0.81
Ulcer Index	41.72%	21.85%
Max Drawdown	-64.8%	-50.3%
Avg Correlation to S&P 500	0.35	0.31
5% VaR (daily log return)	-8.82%	-9.57%
5% Expected Shortfall (CVaR)	-13.45%	-12.14%
Skew	0.15	1.19
Excess kurtosis	1.51	4.29
2σ tail days (down / up)	5 / 9	4 / 8

Audit this calculation

Formulas, inputs, and conventions used to compute the metrics on this page.

Inputs & conventions

Shared window for pair metrics: 2025-04-25 → 2026-04-23 (last shared close).
Rolling correlation sample (shared closes): 220 rolling 30-day values (from 249 shared daily returns).
Annualization (days/year): CRWV: 252 days/year; APLD: 252 days/year.
Risk-free rate: Uses the 3-month U.S. Treasury yield (FRED: DGS3MO), averaged over each asset’s window:

CRWV: 4.17% over 2025-04-25 → 2026-04-23.

APLD: 4.17% over 2025-04-25 → 2026-04-23.
Volatility drag (rule of thumb): Estimated from annualized volatility (simple returns). For the log-return framing, see Log returns.

CRWV: ≈ -58.0%/yr

APLD: ≈ -71.5%/yr
Data alignment: No forward fill. Correlation and tail co-moves are computed on shared closes only.
For cross-calendar pairs (e.g., crypto vs stocks), weekend/holiday moves roll into the next shared close.
Return conventions: Volatility/Sharpe/Sortino use simple daily returns. Tail-risk uses daily log returns for distribution stats (but tables show simple returns). Log returns.

Formulas

Daily simple return

r_t = \frac{P_t}{P_{t-1}} - 1

Volatility

\sigma_{ann} = \sigma(r_t)\sqrt{A}

Volatility drag (approx.)

\text{drag} \approx \tfrac{1}{2}\sigma_{ann}^2

Sharpe Ratio

S = \frac{A\,\bar{r} - r_f}{\sigma(r_t)\sqrt{A}}

Sortino Ratio

So = \frac{A\,\bar{r} - r_f}{\sqrt{\mathbb{E}[\min(0,\,r_t - r_f/A)^2]}\,\sqrt{A}}

Maximum Drawdown

MDD = \min_t\left(\frac{P_t}{\max_{s \le t} P_s} - 1\right)

Average Correlation

\rho = \frac{\operatorname{cov}(r^A,\,r^B)}{\sigma_A\,\sigma_B}

Log returns

\ell_t = \ln\left(\frac{P_t}{P_{t-1}}\right)

Notation

$P_t$: Price on day t.
$r_t$: Simple daily return.
$\ell_t$: Log daily return.
$\bar{r}$: Average daily return.
$\sigma(r_t)$: Standard deviation of daily returns.
$A$: Annualization factor (days/year).
$r_f$: Annual risk-free rate.

CoreWeave vs Applied Digital: Frequently Asked Questions

Which has higher volatility: CRWV or APLD?

APLD showed higher volatility at 119.6% annualized, compared to 107.7% for CRWV Over the past year. Higher volatility means larger price swings in both directions.

Does CRWV provide diversification when held with APLD?

CRWV and APLD are moderately correlated over the past year, with an average correlation of 0.51. This offers some diversification benefit, though they still tend to move together during major market moves.

How bad are the worst 5% days for CRWV vs APLD?

Over the past year, CRWV's 5% VaR was -8.82% and its 5% Expected Shortfall was -13.45% (worst 13 days). APLD's were -9.57% and -12.14% (worst 13 days).

Do CRWV and APLD crash together on bad days?

On shared dates (n=249), when APLD has a 2σ down day, CRWV also does 0.0% (0/4 days). In the other direction, when CRWV has one, APLD also does 0.0% (0/5 days).

Which has better risk-adjusted returns: CRWV or APLD?

APLD showed better risk-adjusted performance with a Sharpe ratio of 2.25 versus CRWV's 1.47 Over the past year.

Can CRWV and APLD be combined in a portfolio?

Yes, though allocation sizing matters. Their moderate correlation offers some diversification benefits. APLD's higher volatility (119.6%) means even small allocations can materially impact overall portfolio risk.

Explore our financial glossary

Which is a better investment: CRWV or APLD?

Share This Comparison of CRWV vs APLD

Relative Performance of CRWV vs APLD (Normalized to 100)

Trade CRWV or APLD

Key Takeaways

Investment Comparison

CoreWeave vs Applied Digital Performance Over Time

CoreWeave vs Applied Digital Correlation

Drawdown

CoreWeave vs Applied Digital Volatility (CRWV vs APLD)

Risk-adjusted ratios

Sharpe Ratio of CRWV and APLD

Sharpe Ratio: CRWV vs. APLD

Sortino Ratio of CRWV and APLD

Sortino Ratio: CRWV vs. APLD

Calmar Ratio of CRWV and APLD

Calmar Ratio: CRWV vs. APLD

Sterling Ratio of CRWV and APLD

Sterling Ratio: CRWV vs. APLD

Treynor Ratio of CRWV and APLD

Treynor Ratio: CRWV vs. APLD

Ulcer Index of CRWV and APLD

Ulcer Index: CRWV vs. APLD

Tail Risk & Distribution Shape (1-Year): CoreWeave vs. Applied Digital

Tail Risk & Distribution Shape: CRWV vs. APLD (1-Year)

Downside co-moves (2σ) — 1-Year

Downside co-move map: CRWV vs. APLD (2σ)

Days when both CRWV and APLD had a big down day (2σ)

Days when CRWV had a big down day

Days when APLD had a big down day

Full Comparison of CoreWeave vs. Applied Digital (1-Year)

Inputs & conventions

Formulas

CoreWeave vs Applied Digital: Frequently Asked Questions

Which has higher volatility: CRWV or APLD?

Does CRWV provide diversification when held with APLD?

How bad are the worst 5% days for CRWV vs APLD?

Do CRWV and APLD crash together on bad days?

Which has better risk-adjusted returns: CRWV or APLD?

Can CRWV and APLD be combined in a portfolio?