catwifmask vs catwifhat

catwifhat ($CWIF) is 15.7× the size of catwifmask (MASK) by market capitalisation. Over the past 30 days, MASK is ahead by 50.2 percentage points (MASK +0.7% against $CWIF -49.5%). Their daily returns move barely in opposite directions (correlation -0.08 across 36 shared trading days). $CWIF has been the more volatile of the two, at 126% annualised against MASK's 107%.

Correlation: -0.08
Size ratio: 1 : 15.7
Ahead over 30 days: MASK

catwifmaskMASK

$0.001007

24h: +0.42%
Market cap: $1.01M
Volume 24h: $25,124
Volatility (ann.): 107%

catwifhat$CWIF

$1.578e-8

24h: +0.21%
Market cap: $15.78M
Volume 24h: $653
Volatility (ann.): 126%

MASK 6.0%Share of the two combined market caps94.0% $CWIF

Performance

MASK$CWIF

7 days+1.39%-41.00%MASK
30 days+0.74%-49.47%MASK

Correlation

-0.08over 36 shared trading days

−1 opposite0 unrelated+1 in step

7d: insufficient data30d: -0.0790d: insufficient data1y: insufficient data

Measured on daily returns rather than on prices. Two assets that both simply trend upward score near 1.0 on raw prices whether or not they move together, so returns are what answer the question people mean by correlation.

Risk & extremes

Metric	MASK	$CWIF
Max drawdown (400d)	-24.9%	-49.5%
Risk-adjusted return (90d)	-0.15	-0.39

Relative strength over 90 days: MASK outperformed $CWIF by 66.7% — measured on the MASK/$CWIF ratio, so it holds regardless of market direction.

catwifmask →catwifhat →