Near Protocol vs Aptos (NEAR vs APT) 2026: Crypto Returns, Risk & Volatility

Q: Which is a better investment: NEAR or APT?

Over the past year, NEAR looks like the better investment: it had higher total return (NEAR -44.3% vs APT -82.8%) and a higher Sharpe ratio (NEAR -0.17 vs APT -1.55). On risk, APT was less volatile (APT 90.1% vs NEAR 98.0%), NEAR had a smaller max drawdown (NEAR -71.5% vs APT -86.9%), and NEAR had less severe losses on the worst 5% of days (Expected Shortfall of NEAR -10.79% vs APT -10.88%).

Written by Gale Finance Team

Reviewed by Sid Kalla CFA Charterholder

Quick answer

Which is a better investment: NEAR or APT?

Over the past year, NEAR outperformed APT. NEAR returned -44.3% compared with APT’s -82.8%. NEAR had the better risk-adjusted return, with a Sharpe ratio of -0.17 versus APT’s -1.55. APT was less volatile than NEAR, but NEAR had a smaller max drawdown than APT.

Total Return

NEAR -44.3%

APT -82.8%

Sharpe Ratio

NEAR -0.17

APT -1.55

Annualized Volatility

NEAR 98.0%

APT 90.1%

Max Drawdown

NEAR -71.5%

APT -86.9%

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

NEAR Total Return

↓ -44.3%

APT Total Return

↓ -82.8%

Relative Performance of NEAR vs APT (Normalized to 100)

NEAR APT

Normalized to 100 at start date for comparison

Trade NEAR or APT

Access these assets on trusted platforms.

Hyperliquid

Trade perpetual futures with up to 50x leverageNEARAPTTrade on Hyperliquid

Binance

Trade spot crypto and futures on a global exchangeNEARAPTTrade on Binance

Affiliate disclosure

Key Takeaways

Total Return: NEAR delivered a -44.3% total return, while APT returned -82.8% over the same period. NEAR outperformed on total returns.
Risk-Adjusted Return (Sharpe Ratio): Both Sharpe ratios were negative (NEAR -0.17 vs APT -1.55), meaning both underperformed the risk-free rate; NEAR was less negative.
Volatility (Annualized): NEAR was more volatile, with 98.0% annualized volatility, versus 90.1% for APT.
Maximum Drawdown: NEAR's maximum drawdown was -71.5%, while APT experienced a deeper drawdown of -86.9%.
Tail Risk (VaR & Expected Shortfall): At the 5% level (daily log returns), NEAR's VaR was -7.77% and its Expected Shortfall (CVaR) was -10.79%; APT's were -7.07% and -10.88%. VaR is the cutoff; Expected Shortfall is the average move on the worst days.
Skew & Kurtosis: Skew: NEAR 0.72 vs APT -0.29. Excess kurtosis: NEAR 4.48 vs APT 4.65. Negative skew leans downside; higher excess kurtosis means fatter tails.
Tail Days & Extremes: 2σ tail days (down/up): NEAR 9/11, APT 6/13. Worst day: NEAR -16.82% (2025-10-10) vs APT -24.39% (2025-10-10). Best day: NEAR +32.52% (2025-11-07) vs APT +20.90% (2026-02-25).
Risk ratios: Sortino - NEAR: -0.26 vs. APT: -2.12 , Calmar - NEAR: -0.62 vs. APT: -0.95 , Sterling - NEAR: -1.15 vs. APT: -1.71 , Treynor - NEAR: -0.09 vs. APT: -0.55 , Ulcer Index - NEAR: 42.20% vs. APT: 55.81%

Investment Comparison

If you invested $10,000 in each asset on April 24, 2025:

NEAR $5,567.4 -44.3%

APT $1,719.31 -82.8%

Difference: $3,848.09 (NEAR ahead)

Near Protocol vs Aptos Performance Over Time

Metric	NEAR	APT
30 Days	10.3%	-15.3%
90 Days	-6.3%	-39%
180 Days	-38%	-71.5%
1 Year	-44.3%	-82.8%

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

Near Protocol vs Aptos Correlation

Average Correlation

strongly correlated

0.64

Current (30-day) 0.65

30-day rolling range -0.24 to +0.97

Near Protocol and Aptos are strongly correlated over the past year. With a correlation of 0.64, these assets tend to move together, limiting diversification benefits.

For portfolio construction, this strong correlation means holding both NEAR and APT provides limited risk reduction — they're likely to decline together in downturns.

Metric	Value
Current (30-day)	0.65
Average (full period)	0.64
Minimum (30-day rolling)	-0.24
Maximum (30-day rolling)	0.97

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

NEAR

-71.5%

APT

-86.9%

Near Protocol experienced its maximum drawdown of -71.5% from 2025-05-10 to 2026-02-11. It has not yet recovered to its previous peak.

Aptos experienced its maximum drawdown of -86.9% from 2025-05-13 to 2026-02-23. It has not yet recovered to its previous peak.

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

Near Protocol vs Aptos Volatility (NEAR vs APT)

NEAR Volatility

98.0%

±5.13% 1-day vol

APT Volatility

90.1%

±4.72% 1-day vol

1-day volatility (1σ)

NEAR

±5.13%

APT

±4.72%

Near Protocol's 98.0% annualized volatility translates to about ±5.13% one-standard-deviation daily volatility.

Aptos's 90.1% annualized volatility translates to about ±4.72% one-standard-deviation daily volatility.

NEAR had the wider volatility profile over this window. That means its day-to-day return distribution was broader; APT 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 NEAR and APT

Sharpe Ratio: NEAR vs. APT

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. Both Sharpe ratios were negative (NEAR -0.17 vs APT -1.55), meaning both underperformed the risk-free rate; NEAR was less negative.

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 NEAR and APT

Sortino Ratio: NEAR vs. APT

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). NEAR 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: NEAR 62.9% vs APT 65.7%. 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 NEAR and APT

Calmar Ratio: NEAR vs. APT

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. NEAR 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 NEAR and APT

Sterling Ratio: NEAR vs. APT

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%). NEAR 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 NEAR and APT

Treynor Ratio: NEAR vs. APT

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. NEAR 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 NEAR and APT

Ulcer Index: NEAR vs. APT

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. NEAR 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): Near Protocol vs. Aptos

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: NEAR vs. APT (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)	NEAR	APT
5% VaR (daily log return)	-7.77%	-7.07%
5% Expected Shortfall (CVaR)	-10.79% (worst 19 days)	-10.88% (worst 19 days)
Skew	0.72	-0.29
Excess kurtosis	4.48	4.65
2σ tail days (down / up)	9 / 11	6 / 13
Worst day	-16.82% (2025-10-10)	-24.39% (2025-10-10)
Best day	+32.52% (2025-11-07)	+20.90% (2026-02-25)

Downside co-moves (2σ) — 1-Year

Computed on shared dates only (n=364). 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: NEAR vs. APT (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 NEAR and APT 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 NEAR and APT had a big down day (2σ)

Date (interval)	NEAR	APT
2025-10-10	-16.82%	-24.39%
2025-11-03	-13.00%	-17.84%
2025-11-21	-10.14%	-12.91%

Days when NEAR had a big down day

Date (interval)	NEAR	APT
2025-05-30	-11.80%	-8.04%
2025-09-25	-9.72%	-7.35%
2025-10-10	-16.82%	-24.39%
2025-11-03	-13.00%	-17.84%
2025-11-20	-12.22%	-4.45%
2025-11-21	-10.14%	-12.91%
2025-12-01	-10.18%	-5.77%
2026-01-30	-11.06%	-2.84%
2026-02-04	-14.36%	-1.79%

Days when APT had a big down day

Date (interval)	NEAR	APT
2025-07-23	-8.87%	-12.10%
2025-10-10	-16.82%	-24.39%
2025-11-03	-13.00%	-17.84%
2025-11-21	-10.14%	-12.91%
2026-01-31	-0.01%	-12.27%
2026-02-05	+11.27%	-15.25%

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 Near Protocol vs. Aptos (1-Year)

Metric	NEAR	APT
Total Return	-44.3%	-82.8%
Annualized Volatility	98.0%	90.1%
Sharpe Ratio	-0.17	-1.55
Sortino Ratio	-0.26	-2.12
Calmar Ratio	-0.62	-0.95
Sterling Ratio	-1.15	-1.71
Treynor Ratio	-0.09	-0.55
Ulcer Index	42.20%	55.81%
Max Drawdown	-71.5%	-86.9%
Avg Correlation to S&P 500	0.34	0.41
5% VaR (daily log return)	-7.77%	-7.07%
5% Expected Shortfall (CVaR)	-10.79%	-10.88%
Skew	0.72	-0.29
Excess kurtosis	4.48	4.65
2σ tail days (down / up)	9 / 11	6 / 13

Audit this calculation

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

Inputs & conventions

Shared window for pair metrics: 2025-04-24 → 2026-04-23 (last shared close).
Rolling correlation sample (shared closes): 335 rolling 30-day values (from 364 shared daily returns).
Annualization (days/year): NEAR: 365 days/year; APT: 365 days/year.
Risk-free rate: Uses the 3-month U.S. Treasury yield (FRED: DGS3MO), averaged over each asset’s window:

NEAR: 4.17% over 2025-04-24 → 2026-04-23.

APT: 4.17% over 2025-04-24 → 2026-04-23.
Volatility drag (rule of thumb): Estimated from annualized volatility (simple returns). For the log-return framing, see Log returns.

NEAR: ≈ -48.0%/yr

APT: ≈ -40.6%/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.

Near Protocol vs Aptos: Frequently Asked Questions

Which has higher volatility: NEAR or APT?

NEAR showed higher volatility at 98.0% annualized, compared to 90.1% for APT Over the past year. Higher volatility means larger price swings in both directions.

Does NEAR provide diversification when held with APT?

NEAR and APT are strongly correlated over the past year, with an average correlation of 0.64. This strong correlation limits diversification benefits.

How bad are the worst 5% days for NEAR vs APT?

Over the past year, NEAR's 5% VaR was -7.77% and its 5% Expected Shortfall was -10.79% (worst 19 days). APT's were -7.07% and -10.88% (worst 19 days).

Do NEAR and APT crash together on bad days?

On shared dates (n=364), when APT has a 2σ down day, NEAR also does 50.0% (3/6 days). In the other direction, when NEAR has one, APT also does 33.3% (3/9 days).

Which has better risk-adjusted returns: NEAR or APT?

Both assets posted negative Sharpe ratios Over the past year (NEAR -0.17 vs APT -1.55), meaning both underperformed the risk-free rate; NEAR was less negative.

Can NEAR and APT be combined in a portfolio?

Yes, though allocation sizing matters. Their strong correlation provides limited risk reduction since they tend to move together. NEAR's higher volatility (98.0%) means even small allocations can materially impact overall portfolio risk.

Explore our financial glossary

Which is a better investment: NEAR or APT?

Share This Comparison of NEAR vs APT

Relative Performance of NEAR vs APT (Normalized to 100)

Trade NEAR or APT

Key Takeaways

Investment Comparison

Near Protocol vs Aptos Performance Over Time

Near Protocol vs Aptos Correlation

Drawdown

Near Protocol vs Aptos Volatility (NEAR vs APT)

Risk-adjusted ratios

Sharpe Ratio of NEAR and APT

Sharpe Ratio: NEAR vs. APT

Sortino Ratio of NEAR and APT

Sortino Ratio: NEAR vs. APT

Calmar Ratio of NEAR and APT

Calmar Ratio: NEAR vs. APT

Sterling Ratio of NEAR and APT

Sterling Ratio: NEAR vs. APT

Treynor Ratio of NEAR and APT

Treynor Ratio: NEAR vs. APT

Ulcer Index of NEAR and APT

Ulcer Index: NEAR vs. APT

Tail Risk & Distribution Shape (1-Year): Near Protocol vs. Aptos

Tail Risk & Distribution Shape: NEAR vs. APT (1-Year)

Downside co-moves (2σ) — 1-Year

Downside co-move map: NEAR vs. APT (2σ)

Days when both NEAR and APT had a big down day (2σ)

Days when NEAR had a big down day

Days when APT had a big down day

Full Comparison of Near Protocol vs. Aptos (1-Year)

Inputs & conventions

Formulas

Near Protocol vs Aptos: Frequently Asked Questions

Which has higher volatility: NEAR or APT?

Does NEAR provide diversification when held with APT?

How bad are the worst 5% days for NEAR vs APT?

Do NEAR and APT crash together on bad days?

Which has better risk-adjusted returns: NEAR or APT?

Can NEAR and APT be combined in a portfolio?