LUNA CLASSIC vs Bordrless

LUNA CLASSIC (LUNC) and Bordrless (BORDR) compared side by side. Over the past 30 days, LUNC is ahead by 79.4 percentage points (LUNC -20.0% against BORDR -99.5%). Their daily returns move loosely together (correlation 0.39 across 20 shared trading days). BORDR has been the more volatile of the two, at 944% annualised against LUNC's 142%.

Correlation: 0.39
Ahead over 30 days: LUNC

LUNA CLASSICLUNC

$9.964e-5

24h: +0.17%
Market cap: —
Volume 24h: $67
Volatility (ann.): 142%

BordrlessBORDR

$2.055e-5

24h: +23.32%
Market cap: $20,548
Volume 24h: $1.10M
Volatility (ann.): 944%

LUNC 0.0%Share of the two combined market caps100.0% BORDR

Performance

LUNCBORDR

7 days-17.19%-10.80%BORDR
30 days-20.03%-99.45%LUNC

Correlation

0.39over 20 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	LUNC	BORDR
Max drawdown (400d)	-29.4%	-99.8%
Risk-adjusted return (90d)	-0.14	-0.10

Relative strength over 90 days: LUNC outperformed BORDR by 2853.3% — measured on the LUNC/BORDR ratio, so it holds regardless of market direction.

LUNA CLASSIC →Bordrless →