PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LCUT vs. LLY
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends
Financials

Performance

LCUT vs. LLY - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Lifetime Brands, Inc. (LCUT) and Eli Lilly and Company (LLY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LCUT achieves a 141.74% return, which is significantly higher than LLY's 5.06% return. Over the past 10 years, LCUT has underperformed LLY with an annualized return of -2.96%, while LLY has yielded a comparatively higher 33.27% annualized return.


LCUT

1D
0.43%
1M
45.27%
YTD
141.74%
6M
123.62%
1Y
187.17%
3Y*
27.45%
5Y*
-8.45%
10Y*
-2.96%

LLY

1D
4.31%
1M
13.99%
YTD
5.06%
6M
11.30%
1Y
47.97%
3Y*
37.29%
5Y*
42.32%
10Y*
33.27%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LCUT vs. LLY - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
LCUT
Lifetime Brands, Inc.
141.74%-30.37%-9.95%-8.95%-51.76%6.23%123.08%-29.39%-38.37%-6.17%
LLY
Eli Lilly and Company
5.06%40.25%33.30%60.91%34.26%66.08%31.04%16.14%40.45%17.83%

Correlation

The correlation between LCUT and LLY is 0.00, 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

0.00

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

0.03

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

0.07

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

0.06

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 6, 1991

0.08

Fundamentals

EPS

LCUT:

-$1.69

LLY:

$28.14

PS Ratio

LCUT:

0.23

LLY:

13.99

Total Revenue (TTM)

LCUT:

$651.36M

LLY:

$72.25B

Gross Profit (TTM)

LCUT:

$244.23M

LLY:

$59.75B

EBITDA (TTM)

LCUT:

$3.18M

LLY:

$32.97B

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

LCUT vs. LLY — Risk / Return Rank

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

LCUT
LCUT Risk / Return Rank: 8787
Overall Rank
LCUT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8989
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LCUT Sortino Ratio Rank: 8888
Sortino Ratio Rank
LCUT Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
LCUT Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
LCUT Martin Ratio Rank: 8282
Martin Ratio Rank

LLY
LLY Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
LLY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LLY Sortino Ratio Rank: 7272
Sortino Ratio Rank
LLY Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
LLY Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
LLY Martin Ratio Rank: 7676
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.

LCUT vs. LLY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lifetime Brands, Inc. (LCUT) and Eli Lilly and Company (LLY). 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.


LCUTLLYDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.89

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.17

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

1.25

+0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.29

2.04

+2.25

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.42

5.07

+2.35

LCUT vs. LLY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LCUT Sharpe Ratio is 2.16, which is higher than the LLY Sharpe Ratio of 1.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LCUT and LLY, 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


LCUTLLYDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.16

1.27

+0.89

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.13

1.30

-1.43

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

-0.05

1.11

-1.16

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.04

0.58

-0.54

Drawdowns

LCUT vs. LLY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LCUT drawdown since its inception was -96.52%, which is greater than LLY's maximum drawdown of -68.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LCUT and LLY.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LCUTLLYDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-96.52%

-68.24%

-28.28%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-43.88%

-23.64%

-20.24%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-73.35%

-34.48%

-38.87%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-83.39%

-34.48%

-48.91%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-83.39%

-34.48%

-48.91%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-57.59%

-0.14%

-57.45%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-43.71%

-19.22%

-24.49%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

25.33%

9.49%

+15.84%

Volatility

LCUT vs. LLY - Volatility Comparison

Lifetime Brands, Inc. (LCUT) has a higher volatility of 43.13% compared to Eli Lilly and Company (LLY) at 9.76%. This indicates that LCUT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LLY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LCUTLLYDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

43.13%

9.76%

+33.37%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

68.74%

27.11%

+41.63%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

87.30%

38.11%

+49.19%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

63.24%

32.84%

+30.40%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

59.47%

30.17%

+29.30%

Dividends

LCUT vs. LLY - Dividend Comparison

LCUT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.81%, more than LLY's 0.57% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
LCUT
Lifetime Brands, Inc.
1.81%4.30%2.88%2.53%2.24%1.06%1.12%2.45%1.69%1.03%0.96%1.17%
LLY
Eli Lilly and Company
0.57%0.56%0.67%0.78%1.07%1.23%1.75%1.96%1.94%2.46%2.77%2.37%

Financials

LCUT vs. LLY - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Lifetime Brands, Inc. and Eli Lilly and Company. 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


0.005.00B10.00B15.00B20.00B20222023202420252026
143.51M
19.80B
(LCUT) Total Revenue
(LLY) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

LCUT vs. LLY - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Lifetime Brands, Inc. and Eli Lilly and Company over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

Gross Margin
Operating Margin
Net Margin
Quarterly
Annual

30.0%40.0%50.0%60.0%70.0%80.0%90.0%20222023202420252026
37.8%
79.0%
Portfolio components
LCUT - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Lifetime Brands, Inc. reported a gross profit of 54.17M and revenue of 143.51M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 37.8%.

LLY - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Eli Lilly and Company reported a gross profit of 15.64B and revenue of 19.80B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 79.0%.

LCUT - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Lifetime Brands, Inc. reported an operating income of -2.23M and revenue of 143.51M, resulting in an operating margin of -1.6%.

LLY - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Eli Lilly and Company reported an operating income of 9.19B and revenue of 19.80B, resulting in an operating margin of 46.4%.

LCUT - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Lifetime Brands, Inc. reported a net income of -4.77M and revenue of 143.51M, resulting in a net margin of -3.3%.

LLY - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Eli Lilly and Company reported a net income of 7.40B and revenue of 19.80B, resulting in a net margin of 37.4%.


Frequently Asked Questions


LCUT and LLY have a correlation of 0.00, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LCUT has higher volatility (43.13%) compared to LLY (9.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LCUT dropped -96.52% vs LLY's -68.24%.

LCUT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.16 vs 1.27), 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 LCUT and LLY

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