LULU vs. ROST
LULU (Lululemon Athletica Inc.) and ROST (Ross Stores, Inc.) are both stocks. Both operate in the Apparel Retail industry within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Over the past 10 years, LULU returned 5.30%/yr vs 16.93%/yr for ROST. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
LULU vs. ROST - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LULU achieves a -45.03% return, which is significantly lower than ROST's 28.16% return. Over the past 10 years, LULU has underperformed ROST with an annualized return of 5.30%, while ROST has yielded a comparatively higher 16.93% annualized return.
LULU
- 1D
- -8.56%
- 1M
- -13.49%
- YTD
- -45.03%
- 6M
- -39.88%
- 1Y
- -65.47%
- 3Y*
- -31.54%
- 5Y*
- -19.09%
- 10Y*
- 5.30%
ROST
- 1D
- -1.15%
- 1M
- 0.64%
- YTD
- 28.16%
- 6M
- 30.09%
- 1Y
- 63.57%
- 3Y*
- 31.73%
- 5Y*
- 15.31%
- 10Y*
- 16.93%
LULU vs. ROST - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LULU Lululemon Athletica Inc. | -45.03% | -45.66% | -25.21% | 59.59% | -18.16% | 12.48% | 50.23% | 90.50% | 54.74% | 20.93% |
ROST Ross Stores, Inc. | 28.16% | 20.41% | 10.39% | 20.64% | 2.94% | -6.03% | 5.81% | 41.72% | 4.78% | 23.53% |
Correlation
The correlation between LULU and ROST is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.37 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.42 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.42 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 30, 2007 | 0.40 |
Fundamentals
LULU:
$13.19B
ROST:
$74.00B
LULU:
$12.35
ROST:
$7.15
LULU:
9.25
ROST:
32.21
LULU:
0.45
ROST:
3.65
LULU:
1.21
ROST:
3.14
LULU:
2.63
ROST:
11.22
LULU:
$11.20B
ROST:
$23.78B
LULU:
$6.24B
ROST:
$4.95B
LULU:
$2.44B
ROST:
$3.62B
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
LULU vs. ROST — Risk / Return Rank
LULU
ROST
LULU vs. ROST - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lululemon Athletica Inc. (LULU) and Ross Stores, Inc. (ROST). 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.
| LULU | ROST | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -3.95 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -6.25 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.69 | 1.50 | -0.81 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -1.15 | 5.46 | -6.62 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.95 | 17.05 | -19.00 |
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
| LULU | ROST | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -1.36 | 2.59 | -3.95 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.45 | 0.52 | -0.97 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.13 | 0.54 | -0.41 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.24 | 0.45 | -0.21 |
Drawdowns
LULU vs. ROST - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LULU drawdown since its inception was -92.26%, which is greater than ROST's maximum drawdown of -82.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LULU and ROST.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LULU | ROST | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -92.26% | -82.23% | -10.03% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -56.94% | -11.70% | -45.24% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -77.66% | -21.08% | -56.58% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -77.66% | -44.13% | -33.53% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -77.66% | -51.41% | -26.25% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -77.66% | -1.89% | -75.77% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -27.56% | -17.94% | -9.62% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 45.92% | 3.74% | +42.18% |
Volatility
LULU vs. ROST - Volatility Comparison
Lululemon Athletica Inc. (LULU) and Ross Stores, Inc. (ROST) have volatilities of 12.89% and 12.44%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LULU | ROST | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.89% | 12.44% | +0.45% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 32.75% | 18.38% | +14.37% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 48.28% | 24.65% | +23.63% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 42.16% | 29.53% | +12.63% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 40.62% | 31.61% | +9.01% |
Dividends
LULU vs. ROST - Dividend Comparison
LULU has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ROST's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.72%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LULU Lululemon Athletica Inc. | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ROST Ross Stores, Inc. | 0.72% | 0.90% | 0.97% | 0.97% | 1.07% | 1.00% | 0.23% | 1.10% | 1.08% | 0.80% | 0.82% | 4.59% |
Financials
LULU vs. ROST - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Lululemon Athletica Inc. and Ross Stores, 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
LULU vs. ROST - Profitability Comparison
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%.
ROST - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Ross Stores, Inc. reported a gross profit of 0.00 and revenue of 6.01B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 0.0%.
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%.
ROST - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Ross Stores, Inc. reported an operating income of 804.03M and revenue of 6.01B, resulting in an operating margin of 13.4%.
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%.
ROST - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Ross Stores, Inc. reported a net income of 649.96M and revenue of 6.01B, resulting in a net margin of 10.8%.
Frequently Asked Questions
LULU and ROST have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LULU has higher volatility (12.89%) compared to ROST (12.44%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LULU dropped -92.26% vs ROST's -82.23%.
ROST currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.59 vs -1.36), 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 LULU and ROST
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