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 | $217.37 | +4.52% | 121.9B | 18.39 | $11.82 | +2.21% |
| HD | $321.33 | +3.75% | 320.4B | 22.81 | $14.09 | +2.88% |
| FND | $49.74 | +8.30% | 5.4B | 27.05 | $1.84 | N/A |
| MLHR | $38.66 | +0.08% | 2.9B | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| ARHS | $6.68 | +7.40% | 945.5M | 14.21 | $0.47 | +5.28% |
| HVT-A | $23.96 | -0.21% | 385.7M | 19.64 | $1.22 | +5.60% |
| HVT | $23.33 | +3.64% | 377.1M | 19.20 | $1.22 | +5.60% |
| EMPG | $17.36 | +0.00% | 143M | 192.89 | $0.09 | N/A |
| TTSH | $2.84 | -0.35% | 111.5M | -28.00 | -$0.10 | N/A |
| LESL | $8.18 | +59.45% | 76.6M | -0.27 | -$29.76 | N/A |
Stock Comparison
LOW vs HD Comparison June 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 121.9B. In comparison, HD has a market cap of 320.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $217.37, while HD trades at $321.33.
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 18.39, whereas HD's P/E ratio is 22.81. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.65%, compared to HD's ROE of +1.13%. 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 June 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 121.9B. In comparison, FND has a market cap of 5.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $217.37, while FND trades at $49.74.
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 18.39, whereas FND's P/E ratio is 27.05. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.65%, compared to FND's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, LOW is less volatile compared to FND. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LOW.Check FND's competition here
LOW vs MLHR Comparison June 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 121.9B. In comparison, MLHR has a market cap of 2.9B. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $217.37, 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 18.39, whereas MLHR's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.65%, compared to MLHR's ROE of +0.07%. 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 June 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 121.9B. In comparison, ARHS has a market cap of 945.5M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $217.37, while ARHS trades at $6.68.
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 18.39, whereas ARHS's P/E ratio is 14.21. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.65%, compared to ARHS's ROE of +0.16%. 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 June 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 121.9B. In comparison, HVT-A has a market cap of 385.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $217.37, while HVT-A trades at $23.96.
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 18.39, whereas HVT-A's P/E ratio is 19.64. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.65%, compared to HVT-A's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LOW is more volatile compared to HVT-A. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LOW.Check HVT-A's competition here
LOW vs HVT Comparison June 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 121.9B. In comparison, HVT has a market cap of 377.1M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $217.37, while HVT trades at $23.33.
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 18.39, whereas HVT's P/E ratio is 19.20. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.65%, compared to HVT's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LOW is more volatile compared to HVT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LOW.Check HVT's competition here
LOW vs EMPG Comparison June 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 121.9B. In comparison, EMPG has a market cap of 143M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $217.37, 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 18.39, whereas EMPG's P/E ratio is 192.89. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.65%, 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 June 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 121.9B. In comparison, TTSH has a market cap of 111.5M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $217.37, while TTSH trades at $2.84.
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 18.39, whereas TTSH's P/E ratio is -28.00. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.65%, compared to TTSH's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LOW is less volatile compared to TTSH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LOW.Check TTSH's competition here
LOW vs LESL Comparison June 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 121.9B. In comparison, LESL has a market cap of 76.6M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $217.37, while LESL trades at $8.18.
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 18.39, whereas LESL's P/E ratio is -0.27. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.65%, compared to LESL's ROE of +0.66%. 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 PFAI Comparison June 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 121.9B. In comparison, PFAI has a market cap of 43M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $217.37, while PFAI trades at $3.80.
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 18.39, whereas PFAI's P/E ratio is -21.53. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.65%, compared to PFAI's ROE of -0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, LOW is more volatile compared to PFAI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LOW.Check PFAI's competition here
LOW vs LIVE Comparison June 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 121.9B. In comparison, LIVE has a market cap of 28.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $217.37, while LIVE trades at $9.19.
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 18.39, whereas LIVE's P/E ratio is -8.43. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.65%, compared to LIVE's ROE of +0.04%. 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 LL Comparison June 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 121.9B. In comparison, LL has a market cap of 25.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $217.37, 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 18.39, whereas LL's P/E ratio is -0.20. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.65%, 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 FLE Comparison June 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 121.9B. In comparison, FLE has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $217.37, 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 18.39, whereas FLE's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.65%, 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 June 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 121.9B. In comparison, CAA has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $217.37, 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 18.39, whereas CAA's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.65%, compared to CAA's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, LOW is more volatile compared to CAA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LOW.Check CAA's competition here
LOW vs HBP Comparison June 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 121.9B. In comparison, HBP has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $217.37, 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 18.39, whereas HBP's P/E ratio is 6.07. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.65%, 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