LMB vs. BWMN

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Limbach Holdings, Inc. (LMB) and Bowman Consulting Group Ltd. (BWMN).

Performance

LMB vs. BWMN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Limbach Holdings, Inc. (LMB) and Bowman Consulting Group Ltd. (BWMN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

LMB vs. BWMN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
LMB Limbach Holdings, Inc.	0.26%	-8.99%	88.12%	336.79%	15.67%	-15.65%
BWMN Bowman Consulting Group Ltd.	-13.87%	32.34%	-29.76%	62.56%	2.85%	51.75%

Fundamentals

EPS LMB : $3.02 BWMN : $0.75
PE Ratio LMB : 25.82 BWMN : 37.95
PEG Ratio LMB : 0.46 BWMN : 0.08
PS Ratio LMB : 1.57 BWMN : 1.32
Total Revenue (TTM) LMB : $603.58M BWMN : $361.05M
Gross Profit (TTM) LMB : $162.40M BWMN : $183.71M
EBITDA (TTM) LMB : $64.27M BWMN : $42.64M

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LMB achieves a 0.26% return, which is significantly higher than BWMN's -13.87% return.

LMB

• 1D: 0.83%
• 1M: -14.62%
• YTD: 0.26%
• 6M: -19.64%
• 1Y: 4.81%
• 3Y*: 65.24%
• 5Y*: 49.76%
• 10Y*: 22.95%

BWMN

• 1D: 1.94%
• 1M: -15.21%
• YTD: -13.87%
• 6M: -32.86%
• 1Y: 30.28%
• 3Y*: -0.31%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

Return for Risk

LMB vs. BWMN — Risk / Return Rank

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

LMB

LMB Risk / Return Rank: 43
LMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
LMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
LMB Omega Ratio Rank: 42
LMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
LMB Martin Ratio Rank: 43

BWMN

BWMN Risk / Return Rank: 60
BWMN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
BWMN Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
BWMN Omega Ratio Rank: 61
BWMN Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
BWMN Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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.

LMB vs. BWMN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Limbach Holdings, Inc. (LMB) and Bowman Consulting Group Ltd. (BWMN). 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.

	LMB	BWMN	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.09	0.67	-0.58
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.50	1.09	-0.58
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.06	1.16	-0.10
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.04	0.64	-0.59
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	0.07	1.56	-1.49
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LMB vs. BWMN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LMB Sharpe Ratio is 0.09, which is lower than the BWMN Sharpe Ratio of 0.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LMB and BWMN, 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

	LMB	BWMN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.09	0.67	-0.58
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.83	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.37	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.37	0.33	+0.04

Correlation

The correlation between LMB and BWMN is 0.28, 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

LMB vs. BWMN - Dividend Comparison

Neither LMB nor BWMN has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

LMB vs. BWMN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LMB drawdown since its inception was -84.10%, which is greater than BWMN's maximum drawdown of -56.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LMB and BWMN.

Drawdown Indicators

	LMB	BWMN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-84.10%	-56.21%	-27.89%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-55.92%	-39.93%	-15.99%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-55.97%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-84.10%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-47.80%	-35.99%	-11.81%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-31.40%	-20.37%	-11.03%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	33.49%	16.24%	+17.25%

Volatility

LMB vs. BWMN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Limbach Holdings, Inc. (LMB) is 16.41%, while Bowman Consulting Group Ltd. (BWMN) has a volatility of 18.87%. This indicates that LMB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BWMN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LMB	BWMN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	16.41%	18.87%	-2.46%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	38.46%	40.23%	-1.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	55.96%	45.79%	+10.17%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	60.34%	47.34%	+13.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	61.80%	47.34%	+14.46%

Financials