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

Performance

DMZPY vs. LULU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Domino'S Pizza Enterprises Ltd (DMZPY) 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, DMZPY achieves a -7.18% return, which is significantly higher than LULU's -39.35% return.


DMZPY

1D
0.00%
1M
1.93%
YTD
-7.18%
6M
-8.78%
1Y
-15.23%
3Y*
-24.39%
5Y*
-30.69%
10Y*

LULU

1D
-0.35%
1M
-2.29%
YTD
-39.35%
6M
-30.87%
1Y
-62.37%
3Y*
-29.87%
5Y*
-17.49%
10Y*
6.48%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

DMZPY vs. LULU - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
DMZPY
Domino'S Pizza Enterprises Ltd
-7.18%-24.88%-47.75%-10.93%-47.63%34.46%70.84%30.42%-19.48%-13.55%
LULU
Lululemon Athletica Inc.
-39.35%-45.66%-25.21%59.59%-18.16%12.48%50.23%90.50%54.74%21.21%

Correlation

The correlation between DMZPY and LULU is -0.01, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


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

-0.01

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

0.02

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

0.02

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2017

0.02

Fundamentals

EPS

DMZPY:

$0.45

LULU:

$14.61

PE Ratio

DMZPY:

14.01

LULU:

8.62

PEG Ratio

DMZPY:

0.93

LULU:

0.42

PS Ratio

DMZPY:

0.31

LULU:

1.36

Total Revenue (TTM)

DMZPY:

$3.90B

LULU:

$11.07B

Gross Profit (TTM)

DMZPY:

$1.14B

LULU:

$6.47B

EBITDA (TTM)

DMZPY:

$431.68M

LULU:

$2.95B

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

DMZPY vs. LULU — Risk / Return Rank

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

DMZPY
DMZPY Risk / Return Rank: 3535
Overall Rank
DMZPY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3333
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DMZPY Sortino Ratio Rank: 3838
Sortino Ratio Rank
DMZPY Omega Ratio Rank: 4242
Omega Ratio Rank
DMZPY Calmar Ratio Rank: 3131
Calmar Ratio Rank
DMZPY Martin Ratio Rank: 2929
Martin Ratio Rank

LULU
LULU Risk / Return Rank: 33
Overall Rank
LULU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LULU Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
Sortino Ratio Rank
LULU Omega Ratio Rank: 22
Omega Ratio Rank
LULU Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
Calmar Ratio Rank
LULU Martin Ratio Rank: 99
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.

DMZPY vs. LULU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Domino'S Pizza Enterprises Ltd (DMZPY) 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.


DMZPYLULUDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.13

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.46

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.06

0.71

+0.35

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.32

-0.97

+0.65

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.64

-1.35

+0.71

DMZPY vs. LULU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DMZPY Sharpe Ratio is -0.18, which is higher than the LULU Sharpe Ratio of -1.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DMZPY 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


DMZPYLULUDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.18

-1.31

+1.13

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.52

-0.42

-0.11

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.16

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.19

0.25

-0.45

Drawdowns

DMZPY vs. LULU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DMZPY drawdown since its inception was -92.65%, roughly equal to the maximum LULU drawdown of -92.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DMZPY and LULU.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


DMZPYLULUDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-92.65%

-92.26%

-0.39%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-47.65%

-64.46%

+16.81%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-78.16%

-76.70%

-1.46%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-92.65%

-76.70%

-15.95%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-76.70%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-88.10%

-75.35%

-12.75%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-46.01%

-27.54%

-18.47%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

23.72%

46.25%

-22.53%

Volatility

DMZPY vs. LULU - Volatility Comparison

Domino'S Pizza Enterprises Ltd (DMZPY) has a higher volatility of 15.46% compared to Lululemon Athletica Inc. (LULU) at 9.72%. This indicates that DMZPY's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LULU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


DMZPYLULUDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

15.46%

9.72%

+5.74%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

65.08%

31.58%

+33.50%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

85.07%

47.75%

+37.32%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

58.71%

42.04%

+16.67%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

57.05%

40.54%

+16.51%

Dividends

DMZPY vs. LULU - Dividend Comparison

DMZPY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.51%, while LULU has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
DMZPY
Domino'S Pizza Enterprises Ltd
2.51%3.57%3.70%1.96%2.59%1.33%1.22%1.61%1.54%0.90%
LULU
Lululemon Athletica Inc.
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Financials

DMZPY vs. LULU - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Domino'S Pizza Enterprises Ltd 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


0.001.00B2.00B3.00B4.00B20212022202320242025
1.08B
2.57B
(DMZPY) Total Revenue
(LULU) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

DMZPY vs. LULU - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Domino'S Pizza Enterprises Ltd 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

20.0%30.0%40.0%50.0%60.0%20212022202320242025
26.8%
55.6%
Portfolio components
DMZPY - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Domino'S Pizza Enterprises Ltd reported a gross profit of 288.86M and revenue of 1.08B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 26.8%.

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 1.43B and revenue of 2.57B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 55.6%.

DMZPY - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Domino'S Pizza Enterprises Ltd reported an operating income of 90.48M and revenue of 1.08B, resulting in an operating margin of 8.4%.

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 444.69M and revenue of 2.57B, resulting in an operating margin of 17.3%.

DMZPY - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Domino'S Pizza Enterprises Ltd reported a net income of 40.17M and revenue of 1.08B, resulting in a net margin of 3.7%.

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 306.84M and revenue of 2.57B, resulting in a net margin of 12.0%.


Frequently Asked Questions


DMZPY and LULU have a correlation of -0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

DMZPY has higher volatility (15.46%) compared to LULU (9.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DMZPY dropped -92.65% vs LULU's -92.26%.

DMZPY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.18 vs -1.31), 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 DMZPY 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