Lowe's Companies, Inc.
Lowe's Companies, Inc. (LOW) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison
See (LOW) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Home Improvement Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LOW | $242.60 | +1.32% | 133.3B | 20.05 | $11.85 | +1.99% |
| HD | $343.49 | +1.35% | 337.5B | 23.81 | $14.24 | +2.71% |
| FND | $57.64 | +3.45% | 6.2B | 29.70 | $1.92 | N/A |
| MLHR | $38.66 | +0.08% | 2.9B | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| ARHS | $7.32 | +3.68% | 1B | 14.79 | $0.48 | N/A |
| HVT-A | $23.74 | -3.14% | 368.2M | 19.08 | $1.19 | +6.09% |
| HVT | $22.07 | +2.37% | 353.4M | 17.99 | $1.19 | +6.09% |
| EMPG | $17.36 | +0.00% | 143M | 192.89 | $0.09 | N/A |
| TTSH | $3.05 | -3.17% | 136.4M | -30.50 | -$0.10 | N/A |
| LIVE | $10.71 | -9.66% | 35M | 2.40 | $4.75 | N/A |
Stock Comparison
LOW vs HD Comparison March 2026
LOW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LOW stands at 133.3B. In comparison, HD has a market cap of 337.5B. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $242.60, while HD trades at $343.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LOW currently has a P/E ratio of 20.05, whereas HD's P/E ratio is 23.81. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.59%, compared to HD's ROE of +1.30%. Regarding short-term risk, LOW is more volatile compared to HD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LOW.Check HD's competition here
LOW vs FND Comparison March 2026
LOW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LOW stands at 133.3B. In comparison, FND has a market cap of 6.2B. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $242.60, while FND trades at $57.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LOW currently has a P/E ratio of 20.05, whereas FND's P/E ratio is 29.70. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.59%, compared to FND's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, LOW and FND have similar daily volatility (1.89).Check FND's competition here
LOW vs MLHR Comparison March 2026
LOW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LOW stands at 133.3B. In comparison, MLHR has a market cap of 2.9B. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $242.60, while MLHR trades at $38.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LOW currently has a P/E ratio of 20.05, whereas MLHR's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.59%, compared to MLHR's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LOW is more volatile compared to MLHR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LOW.Check MLHR's competition here
LOW vs ARHS Comparison March 2026
LOW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LOW stands at 133.3B. In comparison, ARHS has a market cap of 1B. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $242.60, while ARHS trades at $7.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LOW currently has a P/E ratio of 20.05, whereas ARHS's P/E ratio is 14.79. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.59%, compared to ARHS's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, LOW is less volatile compared to ARHS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LOW.Check ARHS's competition here
LOW vs HVT-A Comparison March 2026
LOW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LOW stands at 133.3B. In comparison, HVT-A has a market cap of 368.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $242.60, while HVT-A trades at $23.74.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LOW currently has a P/E ratio of 20.05, whereas HVT-A's P/E ratio is 19.08. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.59%, compared to HVT-A's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LOW is less volatile compared to HVT-A. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LOW.Check HVT-A's competition here
LOW vs HVT Comparison March 2026
LOW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LOW stands at 133.3B. In comparison, HVT has a market cap of 353.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $242.60, while HVT trades at $22.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LOW currently has a P/E ratio of 20.05, whereas HVT's P/E ratio is 17.99. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.59%, compared to HVT's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LOW is less volatile compared to HVT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LOW.Check HVT's competition here
LOW vs EMPG Comparison March 2026
LOW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LOW stands at 133.3B. In comparison, EMPG has a market cap of 143M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $242.60, while EMPG trades at $17.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LOW currently has a P/E ratio of 20.05, whereas EMPG's P/E ratio is 192.89. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.59%, compared to EMPG's ROE of +0.66%. Regarding short-term risk, LOW is more volatile compared to EMPG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LOW.Check EMPG's competition here
LOW vs TTSH Comparison March 2026
LOW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LOW stands at 133.3B. In comparison, TTSH has a market cap of 136.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $242.60, while TTSH trades at $3.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LOW currently has a P/E ratio of 20.05, whereas TTSH's P/E ratio is -30.50. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.59%, compared to TTSH's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LOW is more volatile compared to TTSH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LOW.Check TTSH's competition here
LOW vs LIVE Comparison March 2026
LOW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LOW stands at 133.3B. In comparison, LIVE has a market cap of 35M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $242.60, while LIVE trades at $10.71.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LOW currently has a P/E ratio of 20.05, whereas LIVE's P/E ratio is 2.40. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.59%, compared to LIVE's ROE of +0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, LOW is less volatile compared to LIVE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LOW.Check LIVE's competition here
LOW vs PFAI Comparison March 2026
LOW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LOW stands at 133.3B. In comparison, PFAI has a market cap of 28.1M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $242.60, while PFAI trades at $2.44.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LOW currently has a P/E ratio of 20.05, whereas PFAI's P/E ratio is -120.00. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.59%, compared to PFAI's ROE of -0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, LOW is less volatile compared to PFAI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LOW.Check PFAI's competition here
LOW vs LL Comparison March 2026
LOW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LOW stands at 133.3B. In comparison, LL has a market cap of 25.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $242.60, while LL trades at $0.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LOW currently has a P/E ratio of 20.05, whereas LL's P/E ratio is -0.20. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.59%, compared to LL's ROE of -0.50%. Regarding short-term risk, LOW is less volatile compared to LL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LOW.Check LL's competition here
LOW vs LESL Comparison March 2026
LOW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LOW stands at 133.3B. In comparison, LESL has a market cap of 11M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $242.60, while LESL trades at $1.13.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LOW currently has a P/E ratio of 20.05, whereas LESL's P/E ratio is -0.04. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.59%, compared to LESL's ROE of +0.78%. Regarding short-term risk, LOW is less volatile compared to LESL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LOW.Check LESL's competition here
LOW vs HBP Comparison March 2026
LOW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LOW stands at 133.3B. In comparison, HBP has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $242.60, while HBP trades at $10.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LOW currently has a P/E ratio of 20.05, whereas HBP's P/E ratio is 6.07. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.59%, compared to HBP's ROE of +0.72%. Regarding short-term risk, LOW is more volatile compared to HBP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LOW.Check HBP's competition here
LOW vs FLE Comparison March 2026
LOW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LOW stands at 133.3B. In comparison, FLE has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $242.60, while FLE trades at $15,400.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LOW currently has a P/E ratio of 20.05, whereas FLE's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.59%, compared to FLE's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LOW is more volatile compared to FLE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LOW.Check FLE's competition here
LOW vs CAA Comparison March 2026
LOW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LOW stands at 133.3B. In comparison, CAA has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $242.60, while CAA trades at $53.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LOW currently has a P/E ratio of 20.05, whereas CAA's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.59%, compared to CAA's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, LOW is less volatile compared to CAA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LOW.Check CAA's competition here