BWMN vs. LMB

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Bowman Consulting Group Ltd. (BWMN) and Limbach Holdings, Inc. (LMB).

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.

BWMN vs. LMB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BWMN Bowman Consulting Group Ltd.	-13.87%	32.34%	-29.76%	62.56%	2.85%	51.75%
LMB Limbach Holdings, Inc.	0.26%	-8.99%	88.12%	336.79%	15.67%	-15.65%

Fundamentals

EPS BWMN : $0.75 LMB : $3.02
PE Ratio BWMN : 37.95 LMB : 25.82
PEG Ratio BWMN : 0.08 LMB : 0.46
PS Ratio BWMN : 1.32 LMB : 1.57
Total Revenue (TTM) BWMN : $361.05M LMB : $603.58M
Gross Profit (TTM) BWMN : $183.71M LMB : $162.40M
EBITDA (TTM) BWMN : $42.64M LMB : $64.27M

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BWMN achieves a -13.87% return, which is significantly lower than LMB's 0.26% return.

BWMN

• 1D: 1.94%
• 1M: -15.21%
• YTD: -13.87%
• 6M: -32.86%
• 1Y: 30.28%
• 3Y*: -0.31%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

LMB

• 1D: 0.83%
• 1M: -14.62%
• YTD: 0.26%
• 6M: -19.64%
• 1Y: 4.81%
• 3Y*: 65.24%
• 5Y*: 49.76%
• 10Y*: 22.95%

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

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: 60
BWMN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
BWMN Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
BWMN Omega Ratio Rank: 61
BWMN Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
BWMN Martin Ratio Rank: 57

LMB

LMB Risk / Return Rank: 43
LMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
LMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
LMB Omega Ratio Rank: 42
LMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
LMB Martin Ratio Rank: 43

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	0.67	0.09	+0.58
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.09	0.50	+0.58
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.06	+0.10
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.64	0.04	+0.59
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	1.56	0.07	+1.49
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 0.67, which is higher than the LMB Sharpe Ratio of 0.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BWMN and LMB, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BWMN	LMB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.67	0.09	+0.58
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.83	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.37	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.33	0.37	-0.04

Correlation

The correlation between BWMN and LMB is 0.28, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

BWMN vs. LMB - Dividend Comparison

Neither BWMN nor LMB has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

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 (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-55.97%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-84.10%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-35.99%	-47.80%	+11.81%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.37%	-31.40%	+11.03%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	16.24%	33.49%	-17.25%

Volatility

BWMN vs. LMB - Volatility Comparison

Bowman Consulting Group Ltd. (BWMN) has a higher volatility of 18.87% compared to Limbach Holdings, Inc. (LMB) at 16.41%. This indicates that BWMN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier 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	18.87%	16.41%	+2.46%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	40.23%	38.46%	+1.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	45.79%	55.96%	-10.17%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	47.34%	60.34%	-13.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	47.34%	61.80%	-14.46%

Financials