JLL vs. ACU

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated (JLL) and Acme United Corporation (ACU).

Performance

JLL vs. ACU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated (JLL) and Acme United Corporation (ACU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

JLL vs. ACU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
JLL Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated	-9.56%	32.92%	34.03%	18.51%	-40.83%	81.53%	-14.77%	38.32%	-14.54%	48.19%
ACU Acme United Corporation	12.26%	9.67%	-11.61%	100.21%	-33.82%	13.48%	29.39%	71.41%	-37.83%	-6.95%

Fundamentals

Market Cap JLL : $14.66B ACU : $183.05M
EPS JLL : $16.41 ACU : $0.00
PE Ratio JLL : 18.55 ACU : 18.10K
PEG Ratio JLL : 0.78 ACU : 204.15
PS Ratio JLL : 0.56 ACU : 937.92
PB Ratio JLL : 1.95 ACU : 1.56K
Total Revenue (TTM) JLL : $26.12B ACU : $196.54K
Gross Profit (TTM) JLL : $14.19B ACU : $77.41K
EBITDA (TTM) JLL : $1.52B ACU : $16.70M

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JLL achieves a -9.56% return, which is significantly lower than ACU's 12.26% return. Over the past 10 years, JLL has underperformed ACU with an annualized return of 10.17%, while ACU has yielded a comparatively higher 12.64% annualized return.

JLL

• 1D: 2.46%
• 1M: -3.56%
• YTD: -9.56%
• 6M: 2.02%
• 1Y: 22.75%
• 3Y*: 27.89%
• 5Y*: 10.52%
• 10Y*: 10.17%

ACU

• 1D: 1.81%
• 1M: 0.14%
• YTD: 12.26%
• 6M: 10.32%
• 1Y: 15.12%
• 3Y*: 27.01%
• 5Y*: 4.11%
• 10Y*: 12.64%

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

Return for Risk

JLL vs. ACU — Risk / Return Rank

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

JLL

JLL Risk / Return Rank: 63
JLL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
JLL Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
JLL Omega Ratio Rank: 59
JLL Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
JLL Martin Ratio Rank: 67

ACU

ACU Risk / Return Rank: 56
ACU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
ACU Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
ACU Omega Ratio Rank: 50
ACU Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
ACU Martin Ratio Rank: 58

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.

JLL vs. ACU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated (JLL) and Acme United Corporation (ACU). 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.

	JLL	ACU	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.65	0.46	+0.19
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.06	0.93	+0.13
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.15	1.10	+0.05
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.09	0.67	+0.41
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	2.90	1.57	+1.33
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

JLL vs. ACU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JLL Sharpe Ratio is 0.65, which is higher than the ACU Sharpe Ratio of 0.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JLL and ACU, 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

	JLL	ACU	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.65	0.46	+0.19
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.30	0.10	+0.20
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.28	0.30	-0.02
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.21	0.11	+0.10

Correlation

The correlation between JLL and ACU is 0.10, 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

JLL vs. ACU - Dividend Comparison

JLL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ACU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.43%.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
JLL Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.49%	0.65%	0.48%	0.63%	0.35%
ACU Acme United Corporation	1.43%	1.54%	1.61%	1.31%	2.47%	1.54%	1.59%	2.02%	3.09%	1.79%	1.56%	2.07%

Drawdowns

JLL vs. ACU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JLL drawdown since its inception was -85.92%, smaller than the maximum ACU drawdown of -91.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JLL and ACU.

Drawdown Indicators

	JLL	ACU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-85.92%	-91.05%	+5.13%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.89%	-20.05%	-1.84%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-55.54%	-52.47%	-3.07%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-55.54%	-52.47%	-3.07%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-15.15%	-7.14%	-8.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-31.04%	-39.07%	+8.03%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.20%	8.63%	-0.43%

Volatility

JLL vs. ACU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated (JLL) is 7.61%, while Acme United Corporation (ACU) has a volatility of 9.77%. This indicates that JLL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ACU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	JLL	ACU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.61%	9.77%	-2.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	26.90%	19.16%	+7.74%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	35.29%	33.20%	+2.09%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	34.72%	41.30%	-6.58%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	36.34%	42.46%	-6.12%

Financials

JLL vs. ACU - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated and Acme United Corporation over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

JLL - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated reported a gross profit of 4.83B and revenue of 7.61B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 63.4%.

ACU - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Acme United Corporation reported a gross profit of -59.18M and revenue of -148.82M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 39.8%.

JLL - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated reported an operating income of 506.90M and revenue of 7.61B, resulting in an operating margin of 6.7%.

ACU - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Acme United Corporation reported an operating income of -11.81M and revenue of -148.82M, resulting in an operating margin of 7.9%.

JLL - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated reported a net income of 401.70M and revenue of 7.61B, resulting in a net margin of 5.3%.

ACU - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Acme United Corporation reported a net income of -8.30M and revenue of -148.82M, resulting in a net margin of 5.6%.