Lowe's Companies, Inc.

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 126.2B. In comparison, HD has a market cap of 365.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $225.27, while HD trades at $367.28.

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 18.65, whereas HD's P/E ratio is 24.90. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.50%, compared to HD's ROE of +2.36%. 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.

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 126.2B. In comparison, FND has a market cap of 7.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $225.27, while FND trades at $71.44.

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 18.65, whereas FND's P/E ratio is 37.80. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.50%, compared to FND's ROE of +0.10%. 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.

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 126.2B. In comparison, MLHR has a market cap of 2.9B. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $225.27, 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 18.65, whereas MLHR's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.50%, compared to MLHR's ROE of +0.02%. 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.

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 126.2B. In comparison, ARHS has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $225.27, while ARHS trades at $8.76.

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 18.65, whereas ARHS's P/E ratio is 21.37. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.50%, compared to ARHS's ROE of +0.18%. 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.

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 126.2B. In comparison, HVT has a market cap of 319.6M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $225.27, while HVT trades at $19.77.

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 18.65, whereas HVT's P/E ratio is 15.45. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.50%, compared to HVT's ROE of +0.07%. 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.

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 126.2B. In comparison, HVT-A has a market cap of 318.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $225.27, while HVT-A trades at $20.71.

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 18.65, whereas HVT-A's P/E ratio is 16.18. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.50%, compared to HVT-A's ROE of +0.07%. 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.

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 126.2B. In comparison, TTSH has a market cap of 284.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $225.27, while TTSH trades at $6.37.

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 18.65, whereas TTSH's P/E ratio is 637.00. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.50%, compared to TTSH's ROE of +0.01%. 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.

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 126.2B. In comparison, LESL has a market cap of 131.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $225.27, while LESL trades at $0.71.

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 18.65, whereas LESL's P/E ratio is -2.83. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.50%, compared to LESL's ROE of +0.22%. 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.

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 126.2B. In comparison, LIVE has a market cap of 46.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $225.27, while LIVE trades at $15.00.

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 18.65, whereas LIVE's P/E ratio is -7.39. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.50%, compared to LIVE's ROE of -0.08%. 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.

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 126.2B. In comparison, PFAI has a market cap of 30.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $225.27, while PFAI trades at $2.68.

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 18.65, whereas PFAI's P/E ratio is 44.67. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.50%, compared to PFAI's ROE of -0.43%. 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.

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 126.2B. In comparison, LL has a market cap of 25.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $225.27, 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 18.65, whereas LL's P/E ratio is -0.20. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.50%, compared to LL's ROE of -0.33%. 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.

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 126.2B. In comparison, HBP has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, LOW is priced at $225.27, 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 18.65, whereas HBP's P/E ratio is 6.07. In terms of profitability, LOW's ROE is -0.50%, 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.