MTL.TO vs. L.TO

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Mullen Group Ltd. (MTL.TO) and Loblaw Companies Limited (L.TO).

Performance

MTL.TO vs. L.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Mullen Group Ltd. (MTL.TO) and Loblaw Companies Limited (L.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

MTL.TO vs. L.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
MTL.TO Mullen Group Ltd.	9.42%	14.66%	9.57%	1.51%	31.70%	10.96%	23.04%	-19.32%	-19.13%	-18.83%
L.TO Loblaw Companies Limited	2.44%	32.54%	50.14%	9.65%	18.16%	70.07%	-3.01%	13.23%	14.59%	-2.20%

Fundamentals

Market Cap MTL.TO : CA$2.24B L.TO : CA$75.34B
EPS MTL.TO : CA$0.84 L.TO : CA$4.47
PE Ratio MTL.TO : 20.29 L.TO : 14.19
PS Ratio MTL.TO : 0.87 L.TO : 0.59
PB Ratio MTL.TO : 1.97 L.TO : 6.83
Total Revenue (TTM) MTL.TO : CA$2.13B L.TO : CA$63.90B
Gross Profit (TTM) MTL.TO : CA$493.59M L.TO : CA$19.99B
EBITDA (TTM) MTL.TO : CA$324.64M L.TO : CA$7.20B

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MTL.TO achieves a 9.42% return, which is significantly higher than L.TO's 2.44% return. Over the past 10 years, MTL.TO has underperformed L.TO with an annualized return of 6.81%, while L.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 18.51% annualized return.

MTL.TO

• 1D: 2.21%
• 1M: -0.99%
• YTD: 9.42%
• 6M: 25.49%
• 1Y: 44.08%
• 3Y*: 10.72%
• 5Y*: 11.49%
• 10Y*: 6.81%

L.TO

• 1D: -0.39%
• 1M: 0.54%
• YTD: 2.44%
• 6M: 18.36%
• 1Y: 27.02%
• 3Y*: 29.27%
• 5Y*: 31.77%
• 10Y*: 18.51%

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

Return for Risk

MTL.TO vs. L.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

MTL.TO

MTL.TO Risk / Return Rank: 90
MTL.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
MTL.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
MTL.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 88
MTL.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
MTL.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 93

L.TO

L.TO Risk / Return Rank: 79
L.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
L.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
L.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 74
L.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
L.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 82

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.

MTL.TO vs. L.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Mullen Group Ltd. (MTL.TO) and Loblaw Companies Limited (L.TO). 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.

	MTL.TO	L.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.86	1.31	+0.55
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.36	1.83	+0.53
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.23	+0.13
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.75	2.74	+2.01
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	13.52	6.23	+7.29
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MTL.TO vs. L.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MTL.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.86, which is higher than the L.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MTL.TO and L.TO, 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

	MTL.TO	L.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.86	1.31	+0.55
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.43	1.73	-1.30
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.21	1.00	-0.79
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.62	0.69	-1.31

Correlation

The correlation between MTL.TO and L.TO is 0.06, 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

MTL.TO vs. L.TO - Dividend Comparison

MTL.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.51%, more than L.TO's 0.89% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
MTL.TO Mullen Group Ltd.	4.51%	5.34%	5.28%	5.13%	4.67%	4.13%	3.30%	6.47%	4.91%	2.29%	2.82%	8.57%
L.TO Loblaw Companies Limited	0.89%	0.89%	1.58%	2.14%	2.16%	2.32%	3.63%	3.34%	2.51%	1.57%	1.46%	1.52%

Drawdowns

MTL.TO vs. L.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MTL.TO drawdown since its inception was -100.00%, which is greater than L.TO's maximum drawdown of -63.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MTL.TO and L.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	MTL.TO	L.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-100.00%	-63.24%	-36.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.01%	-10.64%	+1.63%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.59%	-13.81%	-7.78%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-77.25%	-20.23%	-57.02%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-99.98%	-8.22%	-91.76%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-93.11%	-14.87%	-78.24%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.17%	4.68%	-1.51%

Volatility

MTL.TO vs. L.TO - Volatility Comparison

Mullen Group Ltd. (MTL.TO) has a higher volatility of 8.52% compared to Loblaw Companies Limited (L.TO) at 5.71%. This indicates that MTL.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than L.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MTL.TO	L.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.52%	5.71%	+2.81%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.88%	15.61%	+2.27%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.79%	20.79%	+3.00%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.98%	18.47%	+8.51%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	31.96%	18.62%	+13.34%

Financials

MTL.TO vs. L.TO - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Mullen Group Ltd. and Loblaw Companies Limited over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

MTL.TO - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Mullen Group Ltd. reported a gross profit of 118.62M and revenue of 533.88M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 22.2%.

L.TO - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Loblaw Companies Limited reported a gross profit of 4.32B and revenue of 15.70B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 27.5%.

MTL.TO - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Mullen Group Ltd. reported an operating income of 36.86M and revenue of 533.88M, resulting in an operating margin of 6.9%.

L.TO - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Loblaw Companies Limited reported an operating income of 929.00M and revenue of 15.70B, resulting in an operating margin of 5.9%.

MTL.TO - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Mullen Group Ltd. reported a net income of 14.61M and revenue of 533.88M, resulting in a net margin of 2.7%.

L.TO - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Loblaw Companies Limited reported a net income of 656.00M and revenue of 15.70B, resulting in a net margin of 4.2%.