CROX vs. LULU

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Crocs, Inc. (CROX) and Lululemon Athletica Inc. (LULU).

Performance

CROX vs. LULU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Crocs, Inc. (CROX) and Lululemon Athletica Inc. (LULU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

CROX vs. LULU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CROX Crocs, Inc.	-2.29%	-21.92%	17.26%	-13.85%	-15.43%	104.63%	49.58%	61.24%	105.54%	84.26%
LULU Lululemon Athletica Inc.	-23.58%	-45.66%	-25.21%	59.59%	-18.16%	12.48%	50.23%	90.50%	54.74%	20.93%

Fundamentals

EPS CROX : -$1.50 LULU : $14.54
PS Ratio CROX : 1.12 LULU : 1.72
Total Revenue (TTM) CROX : $4.04B LULU : $11.07B
Gross Profit (TTM) CROX : $2.36B LULU : $6.47B
EBITDA (TTM) CROX : $342.44M LULU : $2.95B

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CROX achieves a -2.29% return, which is significantly higher than LULU's -23.58% return. Over the past 10 years, CROX has outperformed LULU with an annualized return of 24.42%, while LULU has yielded a comparatively lower 8.74% annualized return.

CROX

• 1D: 0.65%
• 1M: -3.79%
• YTD: -2.29%
• 6M: -1.69%
• 1Y: -23.44%
• 3Y*: -12.90%
• 5Y*: 0.99%
• 10Y*: 24.42%

LULU

• 1D: 3.73%
• 1M: -9.85%
• YTD: -23.58%
• 6M: -10.56%
• 1Y: -43.21%
• 3Y*: -24.17%
• 5Y*: -12.01%
• 10Y*: 8.74%

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

Return for Risk

CROX vs. LULU — Risk / Return Rank

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

CROX

CROX Risk / Return Rank: 24
CROX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
CROX Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
CROX Omega Ratio Rank: 23
CROX Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
CROX Martin Ratio Rank: 27

LULU

LULU Risk / Return Rank: 11
LULU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
LULU Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
LULU Omega Ratio Rank: 9
LULU Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
LULU Martin Ratio Rank: 20

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.

CROX vs. LULU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Crocs, Inc. (CROX) and Lululemon Athletica Inc. (LULU). 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.

	CROX	LULU	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	-0.42	-0.88	+0.46
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	-0.24	-1.11	+0.87
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.96	0.85	+0.12
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.55	-0.78	+0.23
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	-0.83	-1.11	+0.28
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CROX vs. LULU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CROX Sharpe Ratio is -0.42, which is higher than the LULU Sharpe Ratio of -0.88. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CROX and LULU, 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

	CROX	LULU	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.42	-0.88	+0.46
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.02	-0.29	+0.31
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.43	0.22	+0.21
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.14	0.28	-0.14

Correlation

The correlation between CROX and LULU is 0.43, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

CROX vs. LULU - Dividend Comparison

Neither CROX nor LULU has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

CROX vs. LULU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CROX drawdown since its inception was -98.74%, which is greater than LULU's maximum drawdown of -92.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CROX and LULU.

Drawdown Indicators

	CROX	LULU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-98.74%	-92.26%	-6.48%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-38.97%	-56.49%	+17.52%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-73.86%	-71.48%	-2.38%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-75.18%	-71.48%	-3.70%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-53.72%	-68.94%	+15.22%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-61.45%	-27.13%	-34.32%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	25.80%	39.56%	-13.76%

Volatility

CROX vs. LULU - Volatility Comparison

Crocs, Inc. (CROX) and Lululemon Athletica Inc. (LULU) have volatilities of 10.61% and 11.05%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CROX	LULU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.61%	11.05%	-0.44%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	31.87%	28.49%	+3.38%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	56.31%	49.09%	+7.22%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	55.50%	41.49%	+14.01%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	56.92%	40.19%	+16.73%

Financials

CROX vs. LULU - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Crocs, Inc. and Lululemon Athletica Inc. over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

CROX - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Crocs, Inc. reported a gross profit of 523.66M and revenue of 957.64M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 54.7%.

LULU - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Lululemon Athletica Inc. reported a gross profit of 1.43B and revenue of 2.57B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 55.6%.

CROX - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Crocs, Inc. reported an operating income of 146.40M and revenue of 957.64M, resulting in an operating margin of 15.3%.

LULU - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Lululemon Athletica Inc. reported an operating income of 444.69M and revenue of 2.57B, resulting in an operating margin of 17.3%.

CROX - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Crocs, Inc. reported a net income of 105.17M and revenue of 957.64M, resulting in a net margin of 11.0%.

LULU - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Lululemon Athletica Inc. reported a net income of 306.84M and revenue of 2.57B, resulting in a net margin of 12.0%.