ULTA vs. COST

In the year-to-date period, ULTA achieves a -30.94% return, which is significantly lower than COST's 46.90% return. Over the past 10 years, ULTA has underperformed COST with an annualized return of 10.43%, while COST has yielded a comparatively higher 23.95% annualized return.

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Ulta Beauty, Inc. (ULTA) and Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST). 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.

The current ULTA Sharpe Ratio is -0.52, which is lower than the COST Sharpe Ratio of 3.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ULTA and COST, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

ULTA has not paid dividends to shareholders, while COST's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.02%.

The maximum ULTA drawdown since its inception was -87.89%, which is greater than COST's maximum drawdown of -53.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ULTA and COST. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.

Ulta Beauty, Inc. (ULTA) has a higher volatility of 8.62% compared to Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) at 5.83%. This indicates that ULTA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than COST based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Ulta Beauty, Inc. and Costco Wholesale Corporation. You can select fields from income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements to easily visualize and compare the financial health of both companies.