CL vs VZ: Correlation
How closely do Colgate-Palmolive (CL) and Verizon (VZ) trade together? Their weekly returns over three years give a correlation of 0.39, which is moderate.
Data as of 2026-08-27 · refreshed every trading day · weekly returns · methodology
How correlated are CL and VZ?
Over the past 3 years, CL and VZ moved with a correlation of 0.39, which is moderate. The link has loosened recently: the 1-year correlation (0.21) runs below the 3-year figure (0.39). Over 5 years the correlation is 0.40, and the annualized covariance of weekly returns is 149.3 %².
Among the 40 assets we track against CL, VZ ranks #21 by 3-year correlation. Over the last 12 months VZ came out ahead by 8.9 percentage points (+10.4% against +19.3%). Across three years, the rolling one-year figure varied moderately, from 0.21 to 0.69.
How is this computed?
Pearson correlation on weekly returns: ρ(A,B) = cov(rA, rB) / (σA · σB), over windows of 52, 156 and 260 weeks. Covariance is annualized (×52) and expressed in %². Full definitions on the methodology page.
CL vs VZ: side by side
| CL (Colgate-Palmolive) | VZ (Verizon) | |
|---|---|---|
| 1-year return | +10.4% | +19.3% |
| 5-year return | +32.0% | +23.8% |
| Volatility (ann.) | 16.9% | 22.9% |
| Beta vs S&P 500 | 0.17 | 0.15 |
| Max drawdown (3Y) | -29.0% | -17.0% |
| Market cap | $72.5B | $205.4B |
| P/E (trailing) | 36.2 | 12.9 |
| Dividend yield | 2.27% | 5.57% |
| Sector / category | Consumer Staples | Communication Services |
Year-by-year returns
| Year | CL | VZ |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 | -5.4% | -20.0% |
| 2023 | +3.8% | +2.7% |
| 2024 | +16.6% | +13.1% |
| 2025 | -11.0% | +8.9% |
| 2026 | +17.2% | +27.5% |
Calendar-year price returns; the current year is year-to-date as of the data date above.
Are CL and VZ good diversifiers for each other?
Reasonably. At 0.39, CL and VZ keep a meaningful degree of independence, and combining them has historically reduced portfolio volatility.
FAQ
What is the correlation between CL and VZ?
Using weekly returns as of 2026-08-27: 0.39 over 3 years, with 0.21 over the last year and 0.40 over 5 years.
Is VZ a good diversifier for CL?
Reasonably. At 0.39, CL and VZ keep a meaningful degree of independence, and combining them has historically reduced portfolio volatility.
What does a correlation of 0.39 mean?
On the −1 to +1 scale, 0.39 describes how much the two returns move together: +1 is lockstep, 0 is independence, negative values mean opposite directions. It says nothing about which performed better.
Use this data
$ curl https://www.pairbook.io/api/v1/pairs/cl-vs-vz.json
Markdown for the live badge, attribution link included:
[](https://www.pairbook.io/pair/cl-vs-vz/)
Free with attribution; caching and terms are described in the API documentation.
Related comparisons
Hubs: CL correlations · VZ correlations
