GIS vs PG: Correlation
Measured on weekly returns over the past three years, General Mills (GIS) and Procter & Gamble (PG) carry a correlation of 0.42, a moderate link.
Data as of 2026-08-27 · refreshed every trading day · weekly returns · methodology
How correlated are GIS and PG?
Across a 3-year window, the weekly returns of GIS and PG correlate at 0.42, moderate. The relationship has been stable: the 1-year correlation (0.40) sits close to the 3-year figure. Stretching to 5 years gives 0.46, with an annualized covariance of 133.5 %².
Within GIS's tracked universe of 38 assets, PG comes in at #14 by 3-year correlation. The trailing year gives PG the advantage: -12.8% versus -6.1%, a 6.7-point spread. On a rolling one-year basis the correlation drifted between 0.21 and 0.56, a moderate band.
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.
GIS vs PG: side by side
| GIS (General Mills) | PG (Procter & Gamble) | |
|---|---|---|
| 1-year return | -12.8% | -6.1% |
| 5-year return | -14.6% | +13.9% |
| Volatility (ann.) | 20.6% | 15.3% |
| Beta vs S&P 500 | -0.05 | 0.19 |
| Max drawdown (3Y) | -53.4% | -21.2% |
| Market cap | $21.6B | $332.7B |
| P/E (trailing) | – | 21.9 |
| Dividend yield | 6.09% | 2.94% |
| Sector / category | Consumer Staples | Consumer Staples |
Year-by-year returns
| Year | GIS | PG |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 | +28.1% | -5.0% |
| 2023 | -20.0% | -0.9% |
| 2024 | +1.4% | +17.3% |
| 2025 | -23.7% | -12.3% |
| 2026 | -8.8% | +2.1% |
Calendar-year price returns; the current year is year-to-date as of the data date above.
Are GIS and PG good diversifiers for each other?
Reasonably. At 0.42, GIS and PG keep a meaningful degree of independence, and combining them has historically reduced portfolio volatility.
FAQ
What is the correlation between GIS and PG?
As of 2026-08-27, the correlation of weekly returns between GIS and PG is 0.42 over 3 years, 0.40 over 1 year and 0.46 over 5 years.
Is PG a good diversifier for GIS?
Reasonably. At 0.42, GIS and PG keep a meaningful degree of independence, and combining them has historically reduced portfolio volatility.
What does a correlation of 0.42 mean?
On the −1 to +1 scale, 0.42 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/gis-vs-pg.json
Embed this badge (it refreshes with the data), with attribution:
[](https://www.pairbook.io/pair/gis-vs-pg/)
Free with attribution; caching and terms are described in the API documentation.
Related comparisons
Hubs: GIS correlations · PG correlations
