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 | $218.02 | -0.18% | 122.1B | 18.39 | $11.86 | +2.20% |
| HD | $299.81 | +0.77% | 298.9B | 21.10 | $14.22 | +3.09% |
| FND | $44.98 | +3.43% | 4.9B | 24.46 | $1.84 | N/A |
| MLHR | $38.66 | +0.08% | 2.9B | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| ARHS | $5.87 | +2.09% | 830.8M | 12.49 | $0.47 | +6.01% |
| HVT-A | $22.29 | -6.11% | 358.8M | 18.27 | $1.22 | +6.09% |
| HVT | $21.19 | +1.83% | 341.8M | 17.41 | $1.22 | +6.09% |
| EMPG | $17.36 | +0.00% | 143M | 192.89 | $0.09 | N/A |
| TTSH | $2.72 | +2.26% | 108.3M | -27.20 | -$0.10 | N/A |
| PFAI | $3.95 | -1.25% | 46.7M | -23.41 | -$0.17 | N/A |
Stock Comparison
LOW vs HD Comparison May 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 122.1B. In comparison, HD has a market cap of 298.9B. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $218.02, while HD trades at $299.81.
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 21.10. 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 May 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 122.1B. In comparison, FND has a market cap of 4.9B. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $218.02, while FND trades at $44.98.
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 24.46. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.59%, 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 May 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 122.1B. In comparison, MLHR has a market cap of 2.9B. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $218.02, 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 -0.59%, 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 May 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 122.1B. In comparison, ARHS has a market cap of 830.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $218.02, while ARHS trades at $5.87.
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 12.49. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.59%, 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 May 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 122.1B. In comparison, HVT-A has a market cap of 358.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $218.02, while HVT-A trades at $22.29.
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 18.27. 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 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 May 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 122.1B. In comparison, HVT has a market cap of 341.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $218.02, while HVT trades at $21.19.
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 HVT's P/E ratio is 17.41. 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 May 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 122.1B. In comparison, EMPG has a market cap of 143M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $218.02, 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 -0.59%, 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 May 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 122.1B. In comparison, TTSH has a market cap of 108.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $218.02, while TTSH trades at $2.72.
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 -27.20. 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 PFAI Comparison May 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 122.1B. In comparison, PFAI has a market cap of 46.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $218.02, while PFAI trades at $3.95.
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 -23.41. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.59%, compared to PFAI's ROE of -0.29%. 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 LIVE Comparison May 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 122.1B. In comparison, LIVE has a market cap of 28.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $218.02, while LIVE trades at $9.37.
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 -8.60. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.59%, 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 May 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 122.1B. In comparison, LL has a market cap of 25.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $218.02, 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 -0.59%, 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 May 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 122.1B. In comparison, LESL has a market cap of 25.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $218.02, while LESL trades at $2.69.
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 -0.09. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.59%, 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 HBP Comparison May 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 122.1B. In comparison, HBP has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $218.02, 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 -0.59%, 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 CAA Comparison May 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 122.1B. In comparison, CAA has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $218.02, 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 -0.59%, 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
LOW vs FLE Comparison May 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 122.1B. In comparison, FLE has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $218.02, 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 -0.59%, 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