BWMN vs. LMB

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

BWMN (Bowman Consulting Group Ltd.) and LMB (Limbach Holdings, Inc.) are both stocks. Both are in the Industrials sector — BWMN in Consulting Services, LMB in Engineering & Construction. Over the past 5 years, BWMN returned 19.05%/yr vs 53.88%/yr for LMB. At a 0.28 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

BWMN vs. LMB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Bowman Consulting Group Ltd. (BWMN) and Limbach Holdings, Inc. (LMB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BWMN achieves a -1.51% return, which is significantly lower than LMB's 2.97% return.

BWMN

• 1D: 2.39%
• 1M: -0.73%
• YTD: -1.51%
• 6M: -6.26%
• 1Y: 28.03%
• 3Y*: 5.00%
• 5Y*: 19.05%
• 10Y*: —

LMB

• 1D: -2.11%
• 1M: -19.17%
• YTD: 2.97%
• 6M: 16.60%
• 1Y: -39.80%
• 3Y*: 55.04%
• 5Y*: 53.88%
• 10Y*: 23.16%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BWMN vs. LMB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BWMN Bowman Consulting Group Ltd.	-1.51%	32.34%	-29.76%	62.56%	2.85%	51.75%
LMB Limbach Holdings, Inc.	2.97%	-8.99%	88.12%	336.79%	15.67%	-15.65%

Correlation

The correlation between BWMN and LMB is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.42
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.39
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.28
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 10, 2021	0.28

The correlation between BWMN and LMB shifts across timeframes, from 0.28 (all time) to 0.42 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Fundamentals

Market Cap BWMN : $535.06M LMB : $967.34M
EPS BWMN : $0.64 LMB : $2.75
PE Ratio BWMN : 51.20 LMB : 29.19
PEG Ratio BWMN : 0.11 LMB : 0.40
PS Ratio BWMN : 1.44 LMB : 1.49
PB Ratio BWMN : 2.13 LMB : 4.93
Total Revenue (TTM) BWMN : $377.09M LMB : $652.56M
Gross Profit (TTM) BWMN : $175.89M LMB : $163.77M
EBITDA (TTM) BWMN : $42.71M LMB : $58.72M

Return for Risk

BWMN vs. LMB — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

BWMN

BWMN Risk / Return Rank: 57
BWMN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
BWMN Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
BWMN Omega Ratio Rank: 57
BWMN Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
BWMN Martin Ratio Rank: 55

LMB

LMB Risk / Return Rank: 17
LMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
LMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 19
LMB Omega Ratio Rank: 18
LMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 16
LMB Martin Ratio Rank: 21

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

BWMN vs. LMB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Bowman Consulting Group Ltd. (BWMN) and Limbach Holdings, Inc. (LMB). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	BWMN	LMB	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.61	-0.61	+1.22
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.03	-0.53	+1.56
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.15	0.92	+0.23
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.74	-0.67	+1.41
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	1.48	-0.98	+2.47
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BWMN vs. LMB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BWMN Sharpe Ratio is 0.61, which is higher than the LMB Sharpe Ratio of -0.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BWMN and LMB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BWMN	LMB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.61	-0.61	+1.22
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.40	0.87	-0.46
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.37	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.39	0.36	+0.02

Drawdowns

BWMN vs. LMB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BWMN drawdown since its inception was -56.21%, smaller than the maximum LMB drawdown of -84.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BWMN and LMB.

Drawdown Indicators

	BWMN	LMB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-56.21%	-84.10%	+27.89%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-39.93%	-55.92%	+15.99%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-56.21%	-55.92%	-0.29%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-56.21%	-55.92%	-0.29%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-84.10%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-26.81%	-46.39%	+19.58%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.64%	-31.60%	+10.96%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	20.03%	38.11%	-18.08%

Volatility

BWMN vs. LMB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Bowman Consulting Group Ltd. (BWMN) is 12.26%, while Limbach Holdings, Inc. (LMB) has a volatility of 45.01%. This indicates that BWMN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LMB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BWMN	LMB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.26%	45.01%	-32.75%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	31.36%	56.25%	-24.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	45.81%	65.61%	-19.80%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	47.33%	62.60%	-15.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	47.03%	63.22%	-16.19%

Dividends

BWMN vs. LMB - Dividend Comparison

Neither BWMN nor LMB has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Financials

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BWMN and LMB in my portfolio?

BWMN and LMB have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BWMN or LMB?

LMB has higher volatility (45.01%) compared to BWMN (12.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BWMN dropped -56.21% vs LMB's -84.10%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BWMN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.61 vs -0.61), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.