LULU vs. UAA

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Lululemon Athletica Inc. (LULU) and Under Armour, Inc. (UAA).

Performance

LULU vs. UAA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Lululemon Athletica Inc. (LULU) and Under Armour, Inc. (UAA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

LULU vs. UAA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
LULU Lululemon Athletica Inc.	-23.58%	-45.66%	-25.21%	59.59%	-18.16%	12.48%	50.23%	90.50%	54.74%	20.93%
UAA Under Armour, Inc.	15.69%	-39.98%	-5.80%	-13.48%	-52.05%	23.41%	-20.51%	22.24%	22.45%	-50.33%

Fundamentals

EPS LULU : $14.54 UAA : -$1.22
PS Ratio LULU : 1.72 UAA : 0.49
Total Revenue (TTM) LULU : $11.07B UAA : $4.98B
Gross Profit (TTM) LULU : $6.47B UAA : $2.32B
EBITDA (TTM) LULU : $2.95B UAA : -$45.77M

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LULU achieves a -23.58% return, which is significantly lower than UAA's 15.69% return. Over the past 10 years, LULU has outperformed UAA with an annualized return of 8.74%, while UAA has yielded a comparatively lower -18.10% annualized return.

LULU

• 1D: 3.73%
• 1M: -9.85%
• YTD: -23.58%
• 6M: -10.56%
• 1Y: -43.21%
• 3Y*: -24.17%
• 5Y*: -12.01%
• 10Y*: 8.74%

UAA

• 1D: -2.71%
• 1M: -20.47%
• YTD: 15.69%
• 6M: 14.31%
• 1Y: -9.45%
• 3Y*: -15.38%
• 5Y*: -23.52%
• 10Y*: -18.10%

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

Return for Risk

LULU vs. UAA — Risk / Return Rank

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

LULU

LULU Risk / Return Rank: 11
LULU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
LULU Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
LULU Omega Ratio Rank: 9
LULU Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
LULU Martin Ratio Rank: 20

UAA

UAA Risk / Return Rank: 34
UAA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
UAA Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
UAA Omega Ratio Rank: 33
UAA Calmar Ratio Rank: 35
UAA Martin Ratio Rank: 35

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.

LULU vs. UAA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lululemon Athletica Inc. (LULU) and Under Armour, Inc. (UAA). 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	UAA	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	-0.88	-0.17	-0.72
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	-1.11	0.17	-1.28
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.85	1.02	-0.18
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.78	-0.18	-0.59
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	-1.11	-0.32	-0.79
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LULU vs. UAA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LULU Sharpe Ratio is -0.88, which is lower than the UAA Sharpe Ratio of -0.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LULU and UAA, 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

	LULU	UAA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.88	-0.17	-0.72
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.29	-0.45	+0.16
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.22	-0.35	+0.57
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.28	0.06	+0.23

Correlation

The correlation between LULU and UAA is 0.48, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

LULU vs. UAA - Dividend Comparison

Neither LULU nor UAA has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

LULU vs. UAA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LULU drawdown since its inception was -92.26%, roughly equal to the maximum UAA drawdown of -91.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LULU and UAA.

Drawdown Indicators

	LULU	UAA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-92.26%	-91.99%	-0.27%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-56.49%	-43.42%	-13.07%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-71.48%	-84.53%	+13.05%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-71.48%	-91.13%	+19.65%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-68.94%	-88.95%	+20.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-27.13%	-45.35%	+18.22%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	39.56%	24.95%	+14.61%

Volatility

LULU vs. UAA - Volatility Comparison

Lululemon Athletica Inc. (LULU) and Under Armour, Inc. (UAA) have volatilities of 11.05% and 11.15%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	LULU	UAA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.05%	11.15%	-0.10%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	28.49%	37.36%	-8.87%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	49.09%	57.41%	-8.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	41.49%	52.06%	-10.57%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	40.19%	51.75%	-11.56%

Financials

LULU vs. UAA - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Lululemon Athletica Inc. and Under Armour, Inc. over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

LULU - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Lululemon Athletica Inc. reported a gross profit of 1.43B and revenue of 2.57B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 55.6%.

UAA - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Under Armour, Inc. reported a gross profit of 589.74M and revenue of 1.33B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 44.4%.

LULU - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Lululemon Athletica Inc. reported an operating income of 444.69M and revenue of 2.57B, resulting in an operating margin of 17.3%.

UAA - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Under Armour, Inc. reported an operating income of -149.78M and revenue of 1.33B, resulting in an operating margin of -11.3%.

LULU - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Lululemon Athletica Inc. reported a net income of 306.84M and revenue of 2.57B, resulting in a net margin of 12.0%.

UAA - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Under Armour, Inc. reported a net income of -430.83M and revenue of 1.33B, resulting in a net margin of -32.5%.