FLC vs NAMS: Correlation
Measured on weekly returns over the past three years, Flaherty & Crumrine Total Return Fund Inc (FLC) and NewAmsterdam Pharma Company N.V. (NAMS) carry a correlation of 0.47, a moderate link.
Data as of 2026-08-27 · refreshed every trading day · weekly returns · methodology
How correlated are FLC and NAMS?
Over the past 3 years, FLC and NAMS moved with a correlation of 0.47, which is moderate. The link has loosened recently: the 1-year correlation (0.17) runs below the 3-year figure (0.47). Over 5 years the correlation is 0.25, and the annualized covariance of weekly returns is 398.1 %².
By 3-year correlation, NAMS places #16 of the 22 assets tracked against FLC. On 12-month performance NAMS holds a 5.7-point edge, +3.8% against +9.5%. One caveat on sizing: NAMS is 6.6 times as volatile as the other leg, so an equal-dollar split is far from equal-risk.
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.
FLC vs NAMS: side by side
| FLC (Flaherty & Crumrine Total Return Fund Inc) | NAMS (NewAmsterdam Pharma Company N.V.) | |
|---|---|---|
| 1-year return | +3.8% | +9.5% |
| 5-year return | -0.2% | +177.3% |
| Volatility (ann.) | 11.3% | 74.2% |
| Beta vs S&P 500 | 0.48 | 1.73 |
| Max drawdown (3Y) | -10.5% | -45.4% |
| Market cap | $0.2B | $3.1B |
| P/E (trailing) | 9.3 | – |
| Dividend yield | 7.25% | 0.00% |
| Sector / category | US Listed | US Listed |
Year-by-year returns
| Year | FLC | NAMS |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 | -25.1% | +11.8% |
| 2023 | -0.8% | +2.5% |
| 2024 | +23.1% | +130.1% |
| 2025 | +12.4% | +36.5% |
| 2026 | -0.4% | -23.6% |
Calendar-year price returns; the current year is year-to-date as of the data date above.
Are FLC and NAMS good diversifiers for each other?
A fair diversifier. At 0.47, enough of each asset's movement is its own that the pair has smoothed outcomes historically.
FAQ
What is the correlation between FLC and NAMS?
The FLC/NAMS correlation stands at 0.47 on a 3-year window (1 year: 0.17, 5 years: 0.25), computed from weekly returns as of 2026-08-27.
Is NAMS a good diversifier for FLC?
A fair diversifier. At 0.47, enough of each asset's movement is its own that the pair has smoothed outcomes historically.
What does a correlation of 0.47 mean?
Correlation ranges from −1 to +1. Values near +1 mean two assets move together, near 0 that they move independently, and negative values that they tend to move in opposite directions. It measures co-movement, not performance.
Use this data
$ curl https://www.pairbook.io/api/v1/pairs/flc-vs-nams.json
Drop this badge in a README or notebook; it updates with the data:
[](https://www.pairbook.io/pair/flc-vs-nams/)
The core API is free. Terms and every endpoint in the API documentation.
Related comparisons
Hubs: FLC correlations · NAMS correlations
