MCK vs. LULU

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

MCK (McKesson Corporation) and LULU (Lululemon Athletica Inc.) are both stocks. MCK operates in Medical Distribution (Healthcare), while LULU operates in Apparel Retail (Consumer Cyclical). Over the past 10 years, MCK returned 16.13%/yr vs 5.24%/yr for LULU. At a 0.22 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

MCK vs. LULU - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MCK achieves a -6.36% return, which is significantly higher than LULU's -43.43% return. Over the past 10 years, MCK has outperformed LULU with an annualized return of 16.13%, while LULU has yielded a comparatively lower 5.24% annualized return.

MCK

• 1D: -1.16%
• 1M: 4.27%
• YTD: -6.36%
• 6M: -3.74%
• 1Y: 7.98%
• 3Y*: 25.42%
• 5Y*: 32.82%
• 10Y*: 16.13%

LULU

• 1D: 2.91%
• 1M: -10.39%
• YTD: -43.43%
• 6M: -35.78%
• 1Y: -55.69%
• 3Y*: -31.16%
• 5Y*: -18.52%
• 10Y*: 5.24%

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

MCK vs. LULU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
MCK McKesson Corporation	-6.36%	44.54%	23.67%	24.13%	51.82%	44.23%	27.06%	26.72%	-28.40%	11.95%
LULU Lululemon Athletica Inc.	-43.43%	-45.66%	-25.21%	59.59%	-18.16%	12.48%	50.23%	90.50%	54.74%	20.93%

Correlation

The correlation between MCK and LULU is 0.01, 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	0.01
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.02
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.07
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.15
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 30, 2007	0.22

Over the past year, the correlation between MCK and LULU has dropped to 0.01 - well below their long-term average of 0.22, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Fundamentals

Market Cap MCK : $94.07B LULU : $13.57B
EPS MCK : $38.38 LULU : $12.35
PE Ratio MCK : 19.97 LULU : 9.52
PEG Ratio MCK : 0.27 LULU : 0.46
PS Ratio MCK : 0.24 LULU : 1.24
PB Ratio MCK : 13.60 LULU : 2.70
Total Revenue (TTM) MCK : $403.43B LULU : $11.20B
Gross Profit (TTM) MCK : $14.55B LULU : $6.24B
EBITDA (TTM) MCK : $6.91B LULU : $2.44B

Return for Risk

MCK vs. LULU — Risk / Return Rank

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

MCK

MCK Risk / Return Rank: 49
MCK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
MCK Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
MCK Omega Ratio Rank: 47
MCK Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
MCK Martin Ratio Rank: 51

LULU

LULU Risk / Return Rank: 2
LULU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
LULU Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
LULU Omega Ratio Rank: 3
LULU Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
LULU Martin Ratio Rank: 2

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.

MCK vs. LULU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for McKesson Corporation (MCK) and Lululemon Athletica Inc. (LULU). 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.

	MCK	LULU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.28	-1.26	+1.54
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.65	-1.97	+2.61
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.08	0.75	+0.33
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.29	-1.00	+1.29
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.79	-1.73	+2.52
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MCK vs. LULU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MCK Sharpe Ratio is 0.28, which is higher than the LULU Sharpe Ratio of -1.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MCK and LULU, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MCK	LULU	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.28	-1.26	+1.54
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.36	-0.44	+1.80
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.56	0.13	+0.43
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.44	0.24	+0.20

Drawdowns

MCK vs. LULU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCK drawdown since its inception was -82.84%, smaller than the maximum LULU drawdown of -92.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCK and LULU.

Drawdown Indicators

	MCK	LULU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-82.84%	-92.26%	+9.42%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-27.17%	-55.90%	+28.73%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.17%	-77.66%	+50.49%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.17%	-77.66%	+50.49%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-44.23%	-77.66%	+33.43%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-22.92%	-77.01%	+54.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-28.65%	-27.57%	-1.08%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.06%	33.71%	-23.65%

Volatility

MCK vs. LULU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for McKesson Corporation (MCK) is 6.94%, while Lululemon Athletica Inc. (LULU) has a volatility of 13.25%. This indicates that MCK experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LULU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MCK	LULU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.94%	13.25%	-6.31%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.76%	32.89%	-10.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	29.16%	44.36%	-15.20%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.20%	42.19%	-17.99%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.82%	40.61%	-11.79%

Dividends

MCK vs. LULU - Dividend Comparison

MCK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.43%, while LULU has not paid dividends to shareholders.

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%
MCK McKesson Corporation	0.43%	0.37%	0.47%	0.50%	0.54%	0.72%	0.95%	1.16%	1.32%	0.80%	0.80%	0.53%

Financials

MCK vs. LULU - Profitability Comparison

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

MCK - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, McKesson Corporation reported a gross profit of 4.04B and revenue of 96.30B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 4.2%.

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%.

MCK - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, McKesson Corporation reported an operating income of 2.09B and revenue of 96.30B, resulting in an operating margin of 2.2%.

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%.

MCK - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, McKesson Corporation reported a net income of 1.68B and revenue of 96.30B, resulting in a net margin of 1.8%.

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%.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MCK and LULU in my portfolio?

MCK and LULU have a correlation of 0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MCK or LULU?

LULU has higher volatility (13.25%) compared to MCK (6.94%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MCK dropped -82.84% vs LULU's -92.26%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MCK currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.28 vs -1.26), 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.