FANG vs. LULU
FANG (Diamondback Energy, Inc.) and LULU (Lululemon Athletica Inc.) are both stocks. FANG operates in Oil & Gas E&P (Energy), while LULU operates in Apparel Retail (Consumer Cyclical). Over the past 10 years, FANG returned 11.24%/yr vs 5.24%/yr for LULU. At a 0.17 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
FANG vs. LULU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FANG achieves a 33.36% return, which is significantly higher than LULU's -43.43% return. Over the past 10 years, FANG has outperformed LULU with an annualized return of 11.24%, while LULU has yielded a comparatively lower 5.24% annualized return.
FANG
- 1D
- 2.89%
- 1M
- 5.61%
- YTD
- 33.36%
- 6M
- 27.27%
- 1Y
- 44.64%
- 3Y*
- 18.70%
- 5Y*
- 22.65%
- 10Y*
- 11.24%
LULU
- 1D
- 2.91%
- 1M
- -10.39%
- YTD
- -43.43%
- 6M
- -35.78%
- 1Y
- -55.69%
- 3Y*
- -31.16%
- 5Y*
- -18.52%
- 10Y*
- 5.24%
FANG vs. LULU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FANG Diamondback Energy, Inc. | 33.36% | -5.64% | 10.35% | 19.66% | 35.34% | 127.51% | -46.00% | 0.92% | -26.35% | 24.93% |
LULU Lululemon Athletica Inc. | -43.43% | -45.66% | -25.21% | 59.59% | -18.16% | 12.48% | 50.23% | 90.50% | 54.74% | 20.93% |
Correlation
The correlation between FANG and LULU is -0.02, 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 | -0.02 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.08 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.15 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.16 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 15, 2012 | 0.17 |
The correlation between FANG and LULU shifts across timeframes, from -0.02 (1 year) to 0.17 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Fundamentals
FANG:
$56.05B
LULU:
$13.57B
FANG:
$1.40
LULU:
$12.35
FANG:
141.45
LULU:
9.52
FANG:
3.75
LULU:
1.24
FANG:
1.54
LULU:
2.70
FANG:
$15.19B
LULU:
$11.20B
FANG:
$7.30B
LULU:
$6.24B
FANG:
$5.54B
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
FANG vs. LULU — Risk / Return Rank
FANG
LULU
FANG vs. LULU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Diamondback Energy, Inc. (FANG) 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.
| FANG | LULU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.69 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +3.94 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 0.75 | +0.49 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.58 | -1.00 | +4.58 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.07 | -1.73 | +8.80 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FANG | LULU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.43 | -1.26 | +2.69 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.60 | -0.44 | +1.04 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.23 | 0.13 | +0.10 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.47 | 0.24 | +0.22 |
Drawdowns
FANG vs. LULU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FANG drawdown since its inception was -88.72%, roughly equal to the maximum LULU drawdown of -92.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FANG and LULU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FANG | LULU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -88.72% | -92.26% | +3.54% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.53% | -55.90% | +43.37% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -42.10% | -77.66% | +35.56% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -42.10% | -77.66% | +35.56% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -88.72% | -77.66% | -11.06% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.74% | -77.01% | +70.27% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -19.39% | -27.57% | +8.18% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.33% | 33.71% | -27.38% |
Volatility
FANG vs. LULU - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Diamondback Energy, Inc. (FANG) is 11.35%, while Lululemon Athletica Inc. (LULU) has a volatility of 13.25%. This indicates that FANG 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
| FANG | LULU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 11.35% | 13.25% | -1.90% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 23.88% | 32.89% | -9.01% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 31.51% | 44.36% | -12.85% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 37.98% | 42.19% | -4.21% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 49.06% | 40.61% | +8.45% |
Dividends
FANG vs. LULU - Dividend Comparison
FANG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.09%, while LULU has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FANG Diamondback Energy, Inc. | 2.09% | 2.66% | 5.06% | 5.15% | 6.55% | 1.62% | 3.10% | 0.74% | 0.40% |
LULU Lululemon Athletica Inc. | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Financials
FANG vs. LULU - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Diamondback Energy, Inc. 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.
Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities
FANG vs. LULU - Profitability Comparison
FANG - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Diamondback Energy, Inc. reported a gross profit of 3.85B and revenue of 4.24B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 90.9%.
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%.
FANG - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Diamondback Energy, Inc. reported an operating income of 30.00M and revenue of 4.24B, resulting in an operating margin of 0.7%.
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%.
FANG - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Diamondback Energy, Inc. reported a net income of 144.00M and revenue of 4.24B, resulting in a net margin of 3.4%.
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
FANG and LULU have a correlation of -0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LULU has higher volatility (13.25%) compared to FANG (11.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FANG dropped -88.72% vs LULU's -92.26%.
FANG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.43 vs -1.26), 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.
Find the right allocation for FANG 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