PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
SHOE vs. UNM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends
Financials

Performance

SHOE vs. UNM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Shoe Station Group, Inc. (SHOE) and Unum Group (UNM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SHOE achieves a -8.93% return, which is significantly lower than UNM's 20.58% return. Over the past 10 years, SHOE has underperformed UNM with an annualized return of 3.17%, while UNM has yielded a comparatively higher 14.99% annualized return.


SHOE

1D
-0.07%
1M
-13.23%
6M
-8.93%
YTD
-8.93%
1Y
-26.06%
3Y*
-12.59%
5Y*
-14.24%
10Y*
3.17%

UNM

1D
1.03%
1M
9.71%
6M
20.58%
YTD
20.58%
1Y
16.40%
3Y*
27.69%
5Y*
30.34%
10Y*
14.99%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SHOE vs. UNM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
SHOE
Shoe Station Group, Inc.
-8.93%-47.64%11.18%28.52%-38.00%101.21%6.51%12.39%26.61%0.39%
UNM
Unum Group
20.58%8.56%66.31%13.72%73.56%11.87%-16.22%2.63%-45.22%27.19%

Correlation

The correlation between SHOE and UNM is 0.16, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.16

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.20

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.27

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.34

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 16, 1993

0.26

The correlation between SHOE and UNM shifts across timeframes, from 0.16 (1 year) to 0.34 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Fundamentals

Market Cap

SHOE:

$409.71M

UNM:

$14.75B

EPS

SHOE:

$1.36

UNM:

$4.66

PE Ratio

SHOE:

11.13

UNM:

19.81

PS Ratio

SHOE:

0.37

UNM:

1.16

PB Ratio

SHOE:

0.61

UNM:

1.39

Total Revenue (TTM)

SHOE:

$1.13B

UNM:

$13.30B

Gross Profit (TTM)

SHOE:

$409.47M

UNM:

$4.51B

EBITDA (TTM)

SHOE:

$87.75M

UNM:

$1.24B

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

SHOE vs. UNM — Risk / Return Rank

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

SHOE
SHOE Risk / Return Rank: 2121
Overall Rank
SHOE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2020
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SHOE Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
SHOE Omega Ratio Rank: 2222
Omega Ratio Rank
SHOE Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
SHOE Martin Ratio Rank: 2323
Martin Ratio Rank

UNM
UNM Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
UNM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UNM Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
UNM Omega Ratio Rank: 6161
Omega Ratio Rank
UNM Calmar Ratio Rank: 6666
Calmar Ratio Rank
UNM Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

SHOE vs. UNM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Shoe Station Group, Inc. (SHOE) and Unum Group (UNM). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


SHOEUNMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.19

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.55

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.94

1.15

-0.21

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.63

1.03

-1.66

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-1.00

2.24

-3.24

SHOE vs. UNM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SHOE Sharpe Ratio is -0.53, which is lower than the UNM Sharpe Ratio of 0.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SHOE and UNM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

SHOE vs. UNM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SHOE drawdown since its inception was -84.87%, smaller than the maximum UNM drawdown of -89.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SHOE and UNM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


SHOEUNMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-84.87%

-89.38%

+4.51%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-41.25%

-16.04%

-25.21%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-66.06%

-17.94%

-48.12%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-66.06%

-20.95%

-45.11%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-68.53%

-81.06%

+12.53%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-65.46%

-0.42%

-65.04%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-34.80%

-32.63%

-2.17%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

26.08%

7.34%

+18.74%

Volatility

SHOE vs. UNM - Volatility Comparison

Shoe Station Group, Inc. (SHOE) has a higher volatility of 12.81% compared to Unum Group (UNM) at 6.52%. This indicates that SHOE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than UNM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


SHOEUNMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

12.81%

6.52%

+6.29%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

32.19%

15.31%

+16.88%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

49.88%

24.89%

+24.99%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

47.67%

29.91%

+17.76%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

53.58%

37.44%

+16.14%

Dividends

SHOE vs. UNM - Dividend Comparison

SHOE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.11%, more than UNM's 1.99% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
SHOE
Shoe Station Group, Inc.
4.11%3.47%1.59%1.36%1.42%0.65%0.89%0.89%0.93%1.08%1.00%1.08%
UNM
Unum Group
1.99%2.27%2.15%3.07%3.07%4.76%4.97%3.74%3.34%1.57%1.75%2.10%

Financials

SHOE vs. UNM - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Shoe Station Group, Inc. and Unum Group. You can select fields from income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements to easily visualize and compare the financial health of both companies.


Quarterly
Annual

Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities


0.00500.00M1.00B1.50B2.00B2.50B3.00B3.50BOctober2022AprilJulyOctober2023AprilJulyOctober2024AprilJulyOctober2025AprilJulyOctober2026April
270.73M
3.36B
(SHOE) Total Revenue
(UNM) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

SHOE vs. UNM - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Shoe Station Group, Inc. and Unum Group over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

Gross Margin
Operating Margin
Net Margin
Quarterly
Annual

20.0%40.0%60.0%80.0%100.0%October2022AprilJulyOctober2023AprilJulyOctober2024AprilJulyOctober2025AprilJulyOctober2026April
33.3%
40.3%
Portfolio components
SHOE - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, Shoe Station Group, Inc. reported a gross profit of 90.10M and revenue of 270.73M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 33.3%.

UNM - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, Unum Group reported a gross profit of 1.35B and revenue of 3.36B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 40.3%.

SHOE - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, Shoe Station Group, Inc. reported an operating income of -6.04M and revenue of 270.73M, resulting in an operating margin of -2.2%.

UNM - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, Unum Group reported an operating income of 302.70M and revenue of 3.36B, resulting in an operating margin of 9.0%.

SHOE - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, Shoe Station Group, Inc. reported a net income of -5.63M and revenue of 270.73M, resulting in a net margin of -2.1%.

UNM - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jul 2026, Unum Group reported a net income of 232.00M and revenue of 3.36B, resulting in a net margin of 6.9%.


Frequently Asked Questions


SHOE and UNM have a correlation of 0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

SHOE has higher volatility (12.81%) compared to UNM (6.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SHOE dropped -84.87% vs UNM's -89.38%.

UNM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.66 vs -0.53), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for SHOE and UNM

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