PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LAZ vs. ALB
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends
Financials

Performance

LAZ vs. ALB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Lazard Ltd (LAZ) and Albemarle Corporation (ALB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LAZ achieves a -11.17% return, which is significantly lower than ALB's 6.57% return. Over the past 10 years, LAZ has outperformed ALB with an annualized return of 8.68%, while ALB has yielded a comparatively lower 8.06% annualized return.


LAZ

1D
-3.07%
1M
-11.96%
YTD
-11.17%
6M
-12.45%
1Y
-2.89%
3Y*
16.73%
5Y*
3.70%
10Y*
8.68%

ALB

1D
-4.28%
1M
-12.37%
YTD
6.57%
6M
2.75%
1Y
162.90%
3Y*
-10.65%
5Y*
-0.83%
10Y*
8.06%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LAZ vs. ALB - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
LAZ
Lazard Ltd
-11.17%-1.64%54.83%6.92%-16.21%7.41%12.08%15.22%-25.38%36.20%
ALB
Albemarle Corporation
6.57%67.72%-39.50%-32.80%-6.63%59.76%105.39%-3.28%-38.89%50.22%

Correlation

The correlation between LAZ and ALB is 0.20, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.20

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

0.26

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

0.35

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

0.38

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 5, 2005

0.41

Over the past year, the correlation between LAZ and ALB has dropped to 0.20 - well below their long-term average of 0.41, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Fundamentals

Market Cap

LAZ:

$4.52B

ALB:

$17.79B

EPS

LAZ:

$2.61

ALB:

-$2.33

PS Ratio

LAZ:

1.37

ALB:

3.22

PB Ratio

LAZ:

5.13

ALB:

2.34

Total Revenue (TTM)

LAZ:

$3.28B

ALB:

$5.49B

Gross Profit (TTM)

LAZ:

$1.54B

ALB:

$1.02B

EBITDA (TTM)

LAZ:

$477.61M

ALB:

$801.97M

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

LAZ vs. ALB — Risk / Return Rank

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

LAZ
LAZ Risk / Return Rank: 3838
Overall Rank
LAZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LAZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 3636
Sortino Ratio Rank
LAZ Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
LAZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 4040
Calmar Ratio Rank
LAZ Martin Ratio Rank: 3939
Martin Ratio Rank

ALB
ALB Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
ALB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9393
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ALB Sortino Ratio Rank: 8888
Sortino Ratio Rank
ALB Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
ALB Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
ALB Martin Ratio Rank: 9393
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.

LAZ vs. ALB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lazard Ltd (LAZ) and Albemarle Corporation (ALB). 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.


LAZALBDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.69

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.72

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.02

1.36

-0.34

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.09

5.17

-5.26

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.20

14.71

-14.91

LAZ vs. ALB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LAZ Sharpe Ratio is -0.07, which is lower than the ALB Sharpe Ratio of 2.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LAZ and ALB, 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

LAZ vs. ALB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LAZ drawdown since its inception was -62.72%, smaller than the maximum ALB drawdown of -83.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LAZ and ALB.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LAZALBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-62.72%

-83.90%

+21.18%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-31.39%

-31.72%

+0.33%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-44.24%

-78.60%

+34.36%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-44.24%

-83.90%

+39.66%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-59.51%

-83.90%

+24.39%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-25.64%

-51.48%

+25.84%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-23.49%

-20.70%

-2.79%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

14.15%

11.12%

+3.03%

Volatility

LAZ vs. ALB - Volatility Comparison

Lazard Ltd (LAZ) has a higher volatility of 18.07% compared to Albemarle Corporation (ALB) at 15.91%. This indicates that LAZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ALB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LAZALBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

18.07%

15.91%

+2.16%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

32.99%

42.88%

-9.89%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

39.50%

62.62%

-23.12%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

37.44%

54.72%

-17.28%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

36.14%

48.36%

-12.22%

Dividends

LAZ vs. ALB - Dividend Comparison

LAZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.73%, more than ALB's 1.08% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ALB
Albemarle Corporation
1.08%1.15%1.87%1.11%0.73%0.67%1.04%2.01%1.74%1.00%1.42%2.07%
LAZ
Lazard Ltd
4.73%4.12%3.89%5.75%5.60%4.31%4.44%5.88%8.21%5.35%6.55%5.22%

Financials

LAZ vs. ALB - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Lazard Ltd and Albemarle Corporation. 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


500.00M1.00B1.50B2.00B2.50B20222023202420252026
779.40M
1.43B
(LAZ) Total Revenue
(ALB) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

LAZ vs. ALB - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Lazard Ltd and Albemarle Corporation 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%0.0%20.0%40.0%60.0%80.0%100.0%20222023202420252026
100.0%
35.1%
Portfolio components
LAZ - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Lazard Ltd reported a gross profit of 779.40M and revenue of 779.40M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 100.0%.

ALB - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Albemarle Corporation reported a gross profit of 500.97M and revenue of 1.43B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 35.1%.

LAZ - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Lazard Ltd reported an operating income of 112.39M and revenue of 779.40M, resulting in an operating margin of 14.4%.

ALB - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Albemarle Corporation reported an operating income of 233.51M and revenue of 1.43B, resulting in an operating margin of 16.3%.

LAZ - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Lazard Ltd reported a net income of 100.92M and revenue of 779.40M, resulting in a net margin of 13.0%.

ALB - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Albemarle Corporation reported a net income of 277.40M and revenue of 1.43B, resulting in a net margin of 19.4%.


Frequently Asked Questions


LAZ and ALB have a correlation of 0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LAZ has higher volatility (18.07%) compared to ALB (15.91%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LAZ dropped -62.72% vs ALB's -83.90%.

ALB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.62 vs -0.07), 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 LAZ and ALB

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