Lululemon Athletica Inc.

LULU.NE plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LULU.NE stands at 33.5B. In comparison, ATZ.TO has a market cap of 7B. Regarding current trading prices, LULU.NE is priced at CA$8.62, while ATZ.TO trades at CA$73.61.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LULU.NE currently has a P/E ratio of 12.87, whereas ATZ.TO's P/E ratio is 36.81. In terms of profitability, LULU.NE's ROE is +0.43%, compared to ATZ.TO's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, LULU.NE is more volatile compared to ATZ.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LULU.NE.Check ATZ.TO's competition here

LULU.NE plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LULU.NE stands at 33.5B. In comparison, ROOT.TO has a market cap of 127.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LULU.NE is priced at CA$8.62, while ROOT.TO trades at CA$3.17.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LULU.NE currently has a P/E ratio of 12.87, whereas ROOT.TO's P/E ratio is -3.91. In terms of profitability, LULU.NE's ROE is +0.43%, compared to ROOT.TO's ROE of -0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, LULU.NE is more volatile compared to ROOT.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LULU.NE.Check ROOT.TO's competition here