BBY vs LULU Stock Comparison
LULU currently leads BBY in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 70 vs 65. The clearest difference is quality, while BBY has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between BBY and LULU?
LULU leads the current stock comparison as Lululemon Athletica Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Best Buy Co., Inc. vs Lululemon Athletica Inc.
LULU leads
LULU leads by 5 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support LULU, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Best Buy Co., Inc.
Lululemon Athletica Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors LULU over BBY, 70 versus 65 as of Oct 31, 2026. LULU's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience, while BBY holds the stronger momentum profile. LULU also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor LULU today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. LULU lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 5 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Best Buy Co., Inc. and Lululemon Athletica Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
Compare BBY and LULU against another ticker
Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.
AIQ Factor Divergence
Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.
- Quality61 vs 80LULU +19
- Risk Resilience49 vs 56LULU +7
- Momentum79 vs 75BBY +4
- Value66 vs 63Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor LULU. LULU’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience; BBY keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum -3
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
LULU's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — BBY and LULU both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
LULU (Lululemon Athletica Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
BBY (Best Buy Co., Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, fundamentals, technicals.
Which one fits your objective
The same two names rank differently depending on what you are optimizing for. All six reads are shown at once — none of them is hidden behind a toggle.
Balanced
LULULULU on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
BBYBBY on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
BBYBBY on the Momentum factor, by 4 points.
Lower downside
LULULULU on Risk Resilience, by 7 points.
Analyst upside
LULULULU on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | BBY | LULU | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -9.7% | +0.8% | LULU has more room |
| Target dispersion | +46.3% | +69.4% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 13 | 12 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor LULU. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | LULU | 65 vs 70 |
| Fundamentals | BBYon balance | revenue growth 9.4% vs -32.1%; EPS growth 13.7% vs -66%; TTM ROE 42.8% vs 31.3%; gross margin 22.7% vs 55.7%; operating margin 4.4% vs 18.2% — BBY takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 66 vs 63 |
| Technicals | BBY | Price vs 50-day 6.3% vs 3.7%; vs 200-day 29.4% vs -21.9% |
| Risk Resilience | LULU | Risk Resilience 49 vs 56 |
| Analyst expectations | LULU | Target upside -9.7% vs 0.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of BBY and LULU and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.
- The AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on LULU.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28LULU lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 5 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- LULU +5
- 65 vs 70
- 7 sessions ago
- BBY +1
- 66 vs 65
- 30 sessions ago
- LULU +5
- 53 vs 58
- 90 sessions ago
- BBY +4
- 64 vs 60
The lead changed hands 13 times in this window, most recently on Oct 27 when LULU moved ahead of BBY.
AIQ Signal Divergence
Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.
5 bullish / 0 bearish
Only BBY
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (20.04%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (2.1%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only LULU
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (30.34%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.83%)
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bullish Crossover.
LULU leads the comparison while carrying a conflicted signal state, which is one reason the stability rating is not higher.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -4.72%, AIQ -1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -2.35%, AIQ 0 points).
What would flip this result
A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.
- 1BBY closes the Quality gap — currently 19 points behind, the largest single contributor to LULU's edge.
- 2BBY's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed.
- 3LULU's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
The full evidence
Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.
Fundamentals
BBY leads on balance| Metric | BBY | LULU |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 9.4% | -32.1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 13.7% | -66% |
| Gross margin | 22.7% | 55.7% |
| Operating margin | 4.4% | 18.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 42.8% | 31.3% |
| Debt to equity | 1.3 | 0.44 |
Performance
BBY leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | BBY | LULU |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 3% | 9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 9.9% | 9.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 10.4% | -11.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 65.1% | -23.8% |
| Year to date | 44.9% | -49.4% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 16.5% | -40.9% |
Technicals
BBY has the stronger structure| Metric | BBY | LULU |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 67.6 | 68.1 |
| ADX (14) | 19.9 | 22.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | 6.3% | 3.7% |
| Price vs 200-day | 29.4% | -21.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 39.9% | 46.1% |
Risk
LULU is the more resilient| Metric | BBY | LULU |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.45 | 1.21 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.47 | -1.02 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.9 | -1.3 |
| Max drawdown | -33.9% | -57.4% |
| Current drawdown | -2.9% | -51.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 38% | 46.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.3% | -4.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, BBY or LULU?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, LULU is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 70 against BBY's 65. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. BBY is not without a case — it holds the better momentum profile, which matters more if that is the objective you are optimizing for. This is a systematic score, not a recommendation: it ranks the two on the same evidence, it does not know your holding period or tax position.
Is BBY or LULU the better buy right now?
LULU carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor LULU over BBY?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. LULU leads Quality by 19 points; LULU leads Risk Resilience by 7 points; BBY leads Momentum by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, BBY or LULU?
Analyst price targets imply -9.7% upside for BBY and +0.8% for LULU, so the Street currently favors LULU. The model and the Street agree here, which is a broader base of evidence than either alone. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, BBY or LULU?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. The Value factor reads valuation relative to sector peers and to the company's own fundamental quality, so it is not the same as simply having the lower multiple.
Which has stronger growth, BBY or LULU?
BBY on combined revenue and EPS growth. Growth here is measured on reported revenue and earnings, not on forward estimates — it describes what the businesses have delivered, not what the Street expects next.
Which has stronger momentum, BBY or LULU?
BBY on the Momentum factor, by 4 points. Momentum is one of the four weighted factors in the AIQ composite. It has documented persistence over three- to twelve-month horizons, which makes it a timing input rather than a reason to hold something indefinitely.
Which is riskier, BBY or LULU?
LULU is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. LULU on Risk Resilience, by 7 points. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is BBY more profitable than LULU?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 22.7% vs 55.7%; operating margin 4.4% vs 18.2%; ttm roe 42.8% vs 31.3%. BBY leads on one measure and LULU on two measures, and there is no single profitability composite that resolves the split — which of the two reads as "more profitable" depends on whether you weight pricing power or operating leverage.
Is LULU's lead over BBY getting stronger or weaker?
LULU lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 5 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands 13 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-27, when LULU moved ahead of BBY.
What would change the BBY vs LULU verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: BBY closes the Quality gap — currently 19 points behind, the largest single contributor to LULU's edge; BBY's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed; LULU's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about BBY and LULU?
BBY: 5 bullish / 0 bearish. LULU: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. A conflicted state means bullish and bearish rules are active on the same name at once — the technical evidence is not pointing one way, and a decision taken on it carries more timing risk. The most decision-relevant rule on BBY is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On LULU it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare BBY and LULU with others
Continue your research
This page answers which of the two. These answer the questions on either side of it.
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk, each carrying a fixed weight. Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.
The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.
How to use side-by-side comparison →This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.