CCQKL vs BNB
CCQKL (CC) and BNB (BNB) compared side by side. Their daily returns move barely together (correlation 0.03 across 21 shared trading days). BNB has been the more volatile of the two, at 51% annualised against CC's 2%.
- Correlation
- 0.03
CC 0.0%Share of the two combined market caps100.0% BNB
Performance
CCBNB
- 7 daysCC
- 30 days—
- 90 days—
- 1 year—
Correlation
0.03over 21 shared trading days
−1 opposite0 unrelated+1 in step
7d: insufficient data30d: insufficient data90d: 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 | CC | BNB |
|---|---|---|
| Max drawdown (400d) | -0.8% | -58.2% |
| Risk-adjusted return (90d) | -0.44 | 0.45 |
| Best 30 days (past year) | — | +29.4% |
| Worst 30 days (past year) | — | -34.9% |
Relative strength over 90 days: CC outperformed BNB by 8.9% — measured on the CC/BNB ratio, so it holds regardless of market direction.