Seek Returns logo

FLUT vs. LULU: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison

Updated on

Here’s a clear look at FLUT and LULU, comparing key factors like historical performance, profitability, financial strength, growth, dividend, and valuation.

Company Profile

SymbolFLUTLULU
Company NameFlutter Entertainment plclululemon athletica inc.
CountryUnited StatesCanada
GICS SectorConsumer DiscretionaryConsumer Discretionary
GICS IndustryHotels, Restaurants & LeisureTextiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods
Market Capitalization51.78 billion USD23.74 billion USD
ExchangeNYSENasdaqGS
Listing DateOctober 4, 2002July 27, 2007
Security TypeCommon StockCommon Stock

Historical Performance

This chart compares the performance of FLUT and LULU by tracking the growth of an initial $10,000 investment in each. Use the tabs to select the desired time period. Data is adjusted for dividends and splits.

FLUT vs. LULU: Growth of a $10,000 investment over the past one year.

Historical Performance at a Glance

SymbolFLUTLULU
5-Day Price Return1.99%1.50%
13-Week Price Return18.12%-38.80%
26-Week Price Return4.36%-49.31%
52-Week Price Return41.29%-23.54%
Month-to-Date Return-2.56%-1.20%
Year-to-Date Return13.96%-48.19%
10-Day Avg. Volume2.37M3.75M
3-Month Avg. Volume2.43M2.99M
3-Month Volatility30.38%50.78%
Beta1.181.10

Profitability

Return on Equity (TTM)

FLUT

5.32%

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
83.01%
Q3
39.51%
Median
17.38%
Q1
5.32%
Min
-45.92%

FLUT’s Return on Equity of 5.32% is on par with the norm for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry, indicating its profitability relative to shareholder equity is typical for the sector.

LULU

43.48%

Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods Industry

Max
53.33%
Q3
26.13%
Median
18.47%
Q1
7.99%
Min
-10.49%

In the upper quartile for the Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods industry, LULU’s Return on Equity of 43.48% signals a highly effective use of shareholder capital to drive profitability compared to most of its peers.

FLUT vs. LULU: A comparison of their Return on Equity (TTM) against their respective Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure and Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods industry benchmarks.

Net Profit Margin (TTM)

FLUT

3.65%

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
26.45%
Q3
14.67%
Median
8.69%
Q1
3.34%
Min
-11.30%

FLUT’s Net Profit Margin of 3.65% is aligned with the median group of its peers in the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry. This indicates its ability to convert revenue into profit is typical for the sector.

LULU

16.82%

Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods Industry

Max
23.35%
Q3
13.49%
Median
8.45%
Q1
4.18%
Min
-3.90%

A Net Profit Margin of 16.82% places LULU in the upper quartile for the Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods industry, signifying strong profitability and more effective cost management than most of its peers.

FLUT vs. LULU: A comparison of their Net Profit Margin (TTM) against their respective Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure and Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods industry benchmarks.

Operating Profit Margin (TTM)

FLUT

6.71%

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
38.76%
Q3
21.15%
Median
14.20%
Q1
6.43%
Min
-14.56%

FLUT’s Operating Profit Margin of 6.71% is around the midpoint for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry, indicating that its efficiency in managing core business operations is typical for the sector.

LULU

23.36%

Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods Industry

Max
29.47%
Q3
20.87%
Median
13.00%
Q1
7.02%
Min
-3.59%

An Operating Profit Margin of 23.36% places LULU in the upper quartile for the Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods industry. This signals a strong ability to translate revenue into operating profit, outperforming most of its competitors in core business efficiency.

FLUT vs. LULU: A comparison of their Operating Profit Margin (TTM) against their respective Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure and Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods industry benchmarks.

Profitability at a Glance

SymbolFLUTLULU
Return on Equity (TTM)5.32%43.48%
Return on Assets (TTM)2.11%25.05%
Net Profit Margin (TTM)3.65%16.82%
Operating Profit Margin (TTM)6.71%23.36%
Gross Profit Margin (TTM)47.55%59.34%

Financial Strength

Current Ratio (MRQ)

FLUT

0.95

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
2.68
Q3
1.62
Median
1.11
Q1
0.74
Min
0.19

FLUT’s Current Ratio of 0.95 aligns with the median group of the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry, indicating that its short-term liquidity is in line with its sector peers.

LULU

2.28

Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods Industry

Max
3.91
Q3
2.49
Median
1.89
Q1
1.43
Min
0.80

LULU’s Current Ratio of 2.28 aligns with the median group of the Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods industry, indicating that its short-term liquidity is in line with its sector peers.

FLUT vs. LULU: A comparison of their Current Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure and Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods industry benchmarks.

Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)

FLUT

0.69

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
9.88
Q3
4.54
Median
1.52
Q1
0.27
Min
0.00

FLUT’s Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 0.69 is typical for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry, indicating its use of leverage is in line with the sector norm. This suggests a balanced approach to its capital structure.

LULU

0.00

Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods Industry

Max
2.67
Q3
1.29
Median
0.59
Q1
0.24
Min
0.00

Falling into the lower quartile for the Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods industry, LULU’s Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 0.00 points to a conservative financing strategy. This results in lower financial risk but potentially limits strategic investments compared to more leveraged competitors.

FLUT vs. LULU: A comparison of their Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure and Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods industry benchmarks.

Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)

FLUT

1.02

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
26.88
Q3
11.95
Median
3.87
Q1
1.19
Min
-11.84

In the lower quartile for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry, FLUT’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 1.02 indicates a tighter cushion for servicing debt, suggesting less financial flexibility than many of its competitors.

LULU

-47.83

Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods Industry

Max
57.00
Q3
35.85
Median
9.20
Q1
4.29
Min
-32.49

LULU has a negative Interest Coverage Ratio of -47.83. This indicates that its earnings were insufficient to cover even its operational costs, let alone its interest payments, signaling significant financial distress.

FLUT vs. LULU: A comparison of their Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) against their respective Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure and Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods industry benchmarks.

Financial Strength at a Glance

SymbolFLUTLULU
Current Ratio (MRQ)0.952.28
Quick Ratio (MRQ)0.880.98
Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)0.690.00
Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)1.02-47.83

Growth

Revenue Growth

FLUT vs. LULU: A side-by-side comparison of their Revenue Growth for the MRQ (YoY), TTM (YoY), 3-Year CAGR, and 5-Year CAGR periods.

EPS Growth

FLUT vs. LULU: A side-by-side comparison of their EPS Growth for the MRQ (YoY), TTM (YoY), 3-Year CAGR, and 5-Year CAGR periods.

Dividend

Dividend Yield (TTM)

FLUT

0.00%

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
5.88%
Q3
2.37%
Median
0.68%
Q1
0.00%
Min
0.00%

FLUT currently does not pay a dividend, resulting in a yield of 0%. This is a common strategy for growth-focused companies that prioritize reinvesting earnings, though it may be less typical in mature, income-oriented sectors.

LULU

0.00%

Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods Industry

Max
6.59%
Q3
3.60%
Median
2.59%
Q1
0.95%
Min
0.00%

LULU currently does not pay a dividend, resulting in a yield of 0%. This is a common strategy for growth-focused companies that prioritize reinvesting earnings, though it may be less typical in mature, income-oriented sectors.

FLUT vs. LULU: A comparison of their Dividend Yield (TTM) against their respective Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure and Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods industry benchmarks.

Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)

FLUT

0.00%

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
127.31%
Q3
56.79%
Median
19.58%
Q1
0.00%
Min
0.00%

FLUT has a Dividend Payout Ratio of 0%, indicating it does not currently pay a dividend. This is a common strategy for growth-oriented companies that reinvest all profits back into the business.

LULU

0.00%

Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods Industry

Max
195.44%
Q3
106.47%
Median
58.77%
Q1
36.52%
Min
0.00%

LULU has a Dividend Payout Ratio of 0%, indicating it does not currently pay a dividend. This is a common strategy for growth-oriented companies that reinvest all profits back into the business.

FLUT vs. LULU: A comparison of their Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM) against their respective Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure and Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods industry benchmarks.

Dividend at a Glance

SymbolFLUTLULU
Dividend Yield (TTM)0.00%0.00%
Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)0.00%0.00%

Valuation

Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)

FLUT

99.02

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
59.44
Q3
33.98
Median
22.25
Q1
15.53
Min
7.61

At 99.02, FLUT’s P/E Ratio is exceptionally high, exceeding the typical maximum for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry. This suggests the stock may be significantly overvalued compared to its peers and implies high market expectations that could be difficult to meet.

LULU

13.67

Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods Industry

Max
63.29
Q3
34.64
Median
18.01
Q1
13.88
Min
6.04

In the lower quartile for the Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods industry, LULU’s P/E Ratio of 13.67 suggests the stock may be undervalued compared to its peers, potentially presenting an attractive entry point for investors.

FLUT vs. LULU: A comparison of their Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM) against their respective Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure and Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)

FLUT

3.61

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
7.74
Q3
3.88
Median
2.05
Q1
1.19
Min
0.17

FLUT’s P/S Ratio of 3.61 aligns with the market consensus for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry. This suggests its valuation, based on sales, is seen as standard and is on par with its competitors.

LULU

2.30

Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods Industry

Max
5.46
Q3
3.13
Median
1.72
Q1
0.83
Min
0.26

LULU’s P/S Ratio of 2.30 aligns with the market consensus for the Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods industry. This suggests its valuation, based on sales, is seen as standard and is on par with its competitors.

FLUT vs. LULU: A comparison of their Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM) against their respective Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure and Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)

FLUT

3.98

Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure Industry

Max
20.90
Q3
9.78
Median
4.29
Q1
2.22
Min
0.47

FLUT’s P/B Ratio of 3.98 is within the conventional range for the Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure industry. This shows a balanced market view, where the stock’s price is neither at a significant premium nor a discount to the book value of its peers.

LULU

7.80

Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods Industry

Max
9.76
Q3
6.00
Median
3.26
Q1
1.97
Min
0.69

LULU’s P/B Ratio of 7.80 is in the upper tier for the Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods industry. This indicates that investors are paying a premium relative to the company’s net assets, a valuation that hinges on its ability to generate superior profits.

FLUT vs. LULU: A comparison of their Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure and Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods industry benchmarks.

Valuation at a Glance

SymbolFLUTLULU
Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)99.0213.67
Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)3.612.30
Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)3.987.80
Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (TTM)61.2415.57