PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
DECK vs. LULU
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends
Financials

Performance

DECK vs. LULU - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DECK achieves a 9.80% return, which is significantly higher than LULU's -42.85% return. Over the past 10 years, DECK has outperformed LULU with an annualized return of 28.83%, while LULU has yielded a comparatively lower 5.37% annualized return.


DECK

1D
-0.47%
1M
21.67%
YTD
9.80%
6M
12.50%
1Y
12.17%
3Y*
11.65%
5Y*
15.35%
10Y*
28.83%

LULU

1D
-2.52%
1M
-0.31%
YTD
-42.85%
6M
-42.05%
1Y
-50.33%
3Y*
-31.43%
5Y*
-18.89%
10Y*
5.37%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

DECK vs. LULU - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
DECK
Deckers Outdoor Corporation
9.80%-48.95%82.30%67.46%8.97%27.73%69.83%31.97%59.44%44.88%
LULU
Lululemon Athletica Inc.
-42.85%-45.66%-25.21%59.59%-18.16%12.48%50.23%90.50%54.74%20.93%

Correlation

The correlation between DECK and LULU is 0.52, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.52

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.48

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.55

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.49

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 27, 2007

0.48

The correlation between DECK and LULU has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.48 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.

Fundamentals

Market Cap

DECK:

$16.11B

LULU:

$13.72B

EPS

DECK:

$6.98

LULU:

$12.35

PE Ratio

DECK:

16.31

LULU:

9.62

PEG Ratio

DECK:

0.59

LULU:

0.47

PS Ratio

DECK:

3.05

LULU:

1.25

PB Ratio

DECK:

6.44

LULU:

2.73

Total Revenue (TTM)

DECK:

$5.47B

LULU:

$11.20B

Gross Profit (TTM)

DECK:

$3.16B

LULU:

$6.24B

EBITDA (TTM)

DECK:

$1.31B

LULU:

$2.44B

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

DECK vs. LULU — Risk / Return Rank

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

DECK
DECK Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
DECK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4747
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DECK Sortino Ratio Rank: 4545
Sortino Ratio Rank
DECK Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
DECK Calmar Ratio Rank: 4747
Calmar Ratio Rank
DECK Martin Ratio Rank: 4646
Martin Ratio Rank

LULU
LULU Risk / Return Rank: 33
Overall Rank
LULU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LULU Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
Sortino Ratio Rank
LULU Omega Ratio Rank: 44
Omega Ratio Rank
LULU Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
Calmar Ratio Rank
LULU Martin Ratio Rank: 33
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

DECK vs. LULU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Deckers Outdoor Corporation (DECK) 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


DECKLULUDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.30

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.28

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.06

0.78

+0.29

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.16

-0.97

+1.13

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.34

-1.72

+2.06

DECK vs. LULU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DECK Sharpe Ratio is 0.13, which is higher than the LULU Sharpe Ratio of -1.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DECK and LULU, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

DECK vs. LULU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DECK drawdown since its inception was -94.36%, roughly equal to the maximum LULU drawdown of -92.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DECK and LULU.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


DECKLULUDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-94.36%

-92.26%

-2.10%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-35.81%

-53.88%

+18.07%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-64.35%

-77.66%

+13.31%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-64.35%

-77.66%

+13.31%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-64.35%

-77.66%

+13.31%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-48.98%

-76.77%

+27.79%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-40.35%

-27.61%

-12.74%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

16.87%

30.26%

-13.39%

Volatility

DECK vs. LULU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Deckers Outdoor Corporation (DECK) is 10.35%, while Lululemon Athletica Inc. (LULU) has a volatility of 13.47%. This indicates that DECK experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LULU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


DECKLULUDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.35%

13.47%

-3.12%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

31.08%

32.76%

-1.68%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

45.42%

44.48%

+0.94%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

43.98%

42.22%

+1.76%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

42.47%

40.62%

+1.85%

Dividends

DECK vs. LULU - Dividend Comparison

Neither DECK nor LULU has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Financials

DECK vs. LULU - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Deckers Outdoor Corporation and Lululemon Athletica Inc.. You can select fields from income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements to easily visualize and compare the financial health of both companies.


Quarterly
Annual

Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities


0.001.00B2.00B3.00B4.00B20222023202420252026
1.12B
2.47B
(DECK) Total Revenue
(LULU) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

DECK vs. LULU - Profitability Comparison

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

Gross Margin
Operating Margin
Net Margin
Quarterly
Annual

48.0%50.0%52.0%54.0%56.0%58.0%60.0%20222023202420252026
57.6%
54.2%
Portfolio components
DECK - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Deckers Outdoor Corporation reported a gross profit of 644.64M and revenue of 1.12B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 57.6%.

LULU - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Lululemon Athletica Inc. reported a gross profit of 1.34B and revenue of 2.47B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 54.2%.

DECK - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Deckers Outdoor Corporation reported an operating income of 156.73M and revenue of 1.12B, resulting in an operating margin of 14.0%.

LULU - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Lululemon Athletica Inc. reported an operating income of 276.95M and revenue of 2.47B, resulting in an operating margin of 11.2%.

DECK - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Deckers Outdoor Corporation reported a net income of 135.57M and revenue of 1.12B, resulting in a net margin of 12.1%.

LULU - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Lululemon Athletica Inc. reported a net income of 195.05M and revenue of 2.47B, resulting in a net margin of 7.9%.


Frequently Asked Questions


DECK and LULU have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LULU has higher volatility (13.47%) compared to DECK (10.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DECK dropped -94.36% vs LULU's -92.26%.

DECK currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.13 vs -1.17), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for DECK and LULU

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer