LULU Lululemon Athletica Inc. · NASDAQ

What this is. A technical and fundamental reading of one company. The technical half describes where the price has been and which levels it has respected; the fundamental half describes what the business earned and what the price is paying for it. They answer different questions and neither settles the other.

Where it stands. Lululemon closed Friday at $120.81 — 46.54% below the 52-week high it set on December 18, 2025, and 15.67% above the 52-week low it made on June 22. It sits at 13.5% of its own twelve-month range: much nearer the bottom of the year than the top of it. It is down 41.09% over the year and up 1.50% over the last month — a long decline that has recently stopped going down, which is not the same thing as going up.

What the price is paying for. Behind it sits a business that took $11.20B over the last twelve months and kept $1.46B of it — a net margin of 13.03% — for which the market is asking 9.78× trailing earnings. That is a low multiple by almost any comparison, and this page will not tell you it is therefore cheap: the same twelve months that produced those earnings also produced revenue growth of 4.22% and a fall in net income of 19.26%. A low P/E on a shrinking profit is a different object from a low P/E on a growing one.

The thing worth knowing before the report. Lululemon has reported four times in the window this page covers and beaten the consensus estimate every time. The next morning's open was lower on three of those four occasions, including a 19.87% gap down after a 6.53% beat. The next report is Thursday, September 3, 2026 — four sessions after this page was written.

Educational material. Not investment advice, and not a recommendation to buy or sell anything. No price target on this page is a forecast; every level is a place the market has already traded.

This chart opens on February 24, 2026 at a $179.49 close and ends on August 28 at $120.81. That is 32.7% of the price gone in six months — computed — and the path was not a straight line down. It was four distinct legs, three of them lower and one of them, the most recent, sideways.

The highest close on this chart is $186.10 on February 26. The lowest is $105.43 on June 22, the same session that printed the 52-week low of $104.44. Between those two dates the stock lost 43.35% — computed — in a little under four months.

Since June 22 the shape has changed. Ten weeks have produced a 14.59% recovery to Friday's close, but the more useful description is the twenty-session range: $114.69 to $128.86, a band 12.36% wide that the price has stayed inside. The 20-day average sits at $121.06 and the 50-day at $117.81, which is the arithmetic signature of a market going sideways: the short average and the long one have converged to within $3.25 of each other, and Friday's close is between them.

Friday itself was the strongest session in weeks — +5.05%, from a $116.64 open to a $120.81 close, on 3,921,777 shares, or ×1.45 the 30-day average. It recovered the 50-day average and stopped $0.25 short of the 20-day. One session is one session; what makes this one worth naming is that it happened four sessions before the company reports.

Level	What it is	Distance from Friday's close
$154.09	The 200-day average. The price has been below it for the whole of this chart, and the gap is the single widest number on this page.	+$33.28 · +27.55%
$140.99	The 150-day average — the first of the two long averages, and the nearest overhead level with a year of history behind it.	+$20.18 · +16.70%
$128.86	The ceiling of the twenty-session range, traded on August 7. The top of the band the price has spent ten weeks inside.	+$8.05 · +6.66%
$121.06	The 20-day average. Friday closed $0.25 below it after a 5.05% session — near enough that the next ordinary day settles which side it is on.	+$0.25 · +0.21%
$117.81	The 50-day average, recovered on Friday. It sits inside the twenty-session range rather than below it, which is what a sideways market looks like.	−$3.00 · −2.48%
$114.69	The floor of the twenty-session range, traded on August 20. The nearest level below with recent history behind it.	−$6.12 · −5.07%
$104.44	The 52-week low, traded on June 22. Below the twenty-session floor the chart holds very little until here.	−$16.37 · −13.55%

Four averages, for orientation: 20-day $121.06, 50-day $117.81, 150-day $140.99, 200-day $154.09. The close is 0.21% below the first, 2.55% above the second and 21.60% below the fourth. A price above its 50-day and far below its 200-day is a market that has stopped falling recently without having repaired anything.

Before anything else, a trader measures two distances: how far the price would have to fall before the idea is wrong, and how far it could travel to the next level up. On this chart both distances are unusually clean, because the price has spent ten weeks inside a box with a named top and a named bottom.

The stop the chart suggests. Just under the floor of the twenty-session range — the level the price has held since June.

That is a coherent measurement, and it survives the first test a stop has to pass: the average true range over the last fourteen days is $4.36, so a stop $6.31 away sits at 1.45× one ordinary day's travel. It would not be taken out by noise.

And then the calendar. Lululemon reports on Thursday, September 3. The four reports in this window produced next-morning gaps of −11.60%, −0.77%, +9.40% and −19.87% — a mean absolute gap of 10.41%, computed. That is larger than the distance to the stop and larger than the distance to the target, together.

This is the point of working it twice. The stop is not badly placed; it is placed in front of an event it cannot function through. A gap is not a price you can be filled at — the market moves while it is shut, and the first tradeable price on the other side is wherever the open lands. A stop at $114.50 in front of an average 10.41% gap is a request, not a protection.

Which leaves an honest conclusion rather than a clever one: on this chart, in this week, the risk being measured is not the distance to a level. It is the report.

Lululemon has reported four times in the window this page covers, and beat the consensus EPS estimate every time. Here is what the stock did the following session — first at the open, before anybody could act, and then by the close.

^† Volume on the following session as a multiple of the 30-day average up to that point.

Four beats, three lower opens. The relationship between beating the estimate and the stock rising is, on this company's recent record, not a relationship at all. The largest single move on the whole 276-bar series is the −18.58% session of September 5, 2025 — which followed a beat of 6.53%, on ×9.59 the average volume. The second largest down move that came after a report, −8.56% on June 5, followed a beat too.

The mechanism is not mysterious and it is worth stating plainly, because it is the single most common misreading of a page like this: the consensus estimate is what the market has already been told to expect, and it is priced in before the report is read. What moves the stock is everything else in the release — the outlook, the margin, the guidance — none of which appears in the one number the headline compares. A company can beat the estimate and fall 18.58% in a session, and this one has.

Friday traded 3,921,777 shares against a 30-day average of 2,706,392 — ×1.45. That is genuinely above average, and on a +5.05% session it is the more interesting of the two numbers: a large move on thin volume is a handful of participants, while a large move on heavy volume is a crowd. This was neither extreme.

For scale, the 90-day average is 3,445,637 — higher than the 30-day, which says the last month has been quieter than the quarter before it. Both figures are dwarfed by what a report does to this stock: the four next-session volumes in the table above are ×4.29, ×3.09, ×5.70 and ×9.59. September 5, 2025 traded 36,788,900 shares, which is ×13.59 the average that preceded it and more than nine times what Friday traded.

The practical reading is that the volume on this chart is almost entirely a calendar phenomenon. Ordinary sessions trade two to four million shares; the four sessions after reports trade three to fourteen times that. Whatever Friday's ×1.45 means, it is not in the same category as what is scheduled for Thursday.

1 · What it takes in, and what it keeps. Over the last twelve months Lululemon booked $11.204B of revenue and kept $1.460B as net income — a net margin of 13.03%. Gross margin is 55.70% and operating margin 18.21%. Those are strong figures for a clothing retailer: more than half of every dollar of sales survives the cost of making the product, and about an eighth survives everything else.

2 · The direction those figures are moving. This is where the page has to be careful, because the two halves of the sentence point opposite ways. Revenue over the last twelve months is 4.22% higher than the twelve months before it. Net income over the same comparison is 19.26% lower, and earnings per share 16.33% lower — $12.35 against $14.76. The company is selling more and keeping less.

The last reported quarter says the same thing more sharply. Q1 2026, filed June 4: revenue $2.472B, up 4.26% on the same quarter a year earlier; net income $195.0M, down 38%; earnings per share $1.69, down 35%. A quarter in which sales grew and profit fell by more than a third is not a rounding difference — it is the whole fundamental story of this page in one filing.

3 · What the market is paying. 9.78× trailing earnings, on a market capitalisation of $13.72B across 115.48M shares. For context, the company's sales over the last twelve months are $11.20B — the whole business is valued at roughly 1.22× what it sells in a year.

A single-digit P/E on a profitable, growing-revenue business is the kind of number that invites a conclusion, and this page declines to draw one. Both readings are available from the same figures and neither is settled by them: a multiple that low can mean the market has stopped believing the current earnings will persist — and on a company whose net income fell 19.26% in a year, that is not an unreasonable thing for a market to think — or it can mean the market has overcorrected. A P/E is a ratio between a price and a past. It contains no information about which of those two it is.

4 · Three years, for shape.

Revenue has risen in each of the three years — $9.62B to $10.59B to $11.10B. Net income peaked in the middle year and has fallen since, and EPS with it. The trailing twelve months, at $11.204B of revenue and $12.35 of EPS, continues both of those directions. Whatever has been happening to this company's profitability, it started before the price did and it has not yet stopped in the filings.

Two figures that belong here for completeness: beta is 0.863, meaning the stock has historically moved slightly less than the wider market, and Lululemon pays no dividend — the entire return has to come from the price. On a stock down 41.09% over a year, that is not a neutral fact.

The business described above earned $195.0M in its last reported quarter on $2.472B of revenue, and was valued at 9.78× its trailing earnings on Friday. Every word of that was equally true on June 22, when the stock closed at $105.43, and on February 26, when it closed at $186.10. The quarter did not change by 43%. The price did.

That is the same company at three prices inside six months, and it is the reason both halves of this page exist. The fundamentals describe what you would be buying. The chart describes what other people have recently been willing to pay for it. Neither answers the other's question, and a low multiple is not a floor — the multiple was lower at $105.43 than it is now, and it did not stop the decline that produced it.

The September 5, 2025 session is the cleanest demonstration this company has offered of the two coming apart: a beat on the reported number, and a 19.87% gap down before anybody could trade.

TTM	Trailing twelve months — the last four reported quarters added together, rather than the last full financial year.
EPS (diluted)	Profit divided by the share count, counting shares that could exist if every option and convertible were exercised. The stricter of the two usual figures.
P/E	Price divided by earnings per share. What the market pays for one dollar of last year's profit. It says nothing about whether next year's will resemble it.
Net margin	Profit as a percentage of revenue. How much of each dollar taken in is kept.
Gross margin	Revenue less the direct cost of the goods sold, as a percentage of revenue. What survives before wages, rent, marketing and tax.
Gap	The difference between one day's close and the next day's open — price movement that happened while the market was shut, and which no order placed inside market hours can be filled at.
ATR (average true range)	The average distance a price travels in a day, including any overnight gap, over the last N days. Used here to ask whether a stop is inside or outside ordinary daily noise.
Beta	How much this moves when the wider market moves. Below 1 means historically less than the market, in both directions.
52-week high / low	The highest and lowest price traded in the last year, measured here from the daily bars so each has a date attached.
Moving average (SMA)	The average close of the last N days, redrawn daily. A shorter one hugs the price; a longer one describes the trend.
Support / resistance	A price the market has repeatedly stopped falling at, or stopped rising through. A description of past behaviour, not a rule about future behaviour.
Reward-to-risk	Distance to the next level up divided by distance to the stop. Arithmetic on levels; it says nothing about probability — and, as this page shows, it says nothing at all about a session that opens on the other side of both.
Consensus estimate	The average of the forecasts analysts have published for a coming report. It is what the market has already been told to expect — which is why a company can beat it and the stock can still fall 18.58%.

Next earnings: Thursday, September 3, 2026 — four sessions after this page was written — with consensus at $1.79 EPS on $2.458B of revenue. That revenue figure would be 0.55% below the $2.472B of the last reported quarter, computed — the market is not being told to expect sequential growth. The EPS figure would be 5.9% above the last quarter's $1.69, computed.

It is the one scheduled event on the calendar, and on this stock it is not a small one. The last four reports produced overnight gaps averaging 10.41% in absolute terms, the largest single move on the entire 276-bar series is the session after one of them, and every one of those four reports beat the estimate the market had been given.

Lululemon pays no dividend, so there is no ex-date on the calendar and no income to offset a price decline.

The technical half. 276 daily bars from the platform's own price pipeline, pulled August 29, 2026, covering 2025-07-25 to 2026-08-28. The OHLC, the 52-week extremes and their dates, every return, the 30- and 90-day average volumes, the average true range, the five largest moves, the twenty-session range and all four moving averages are computed from that array. The four legs in the timeline are close-to-close between bars located by an eleven-bar pivot scan rather than chosen by eye. Nothing was read off a chart by sight, and the chart above is generated from the same array by tools/analysis-chart.mjs, so a level in the prose and a line on the picture cannot disagree.

The fundamental half. Revenue, gross profit, operating income, net income, diluted EPS and the share count come from Lululemon's own filed income statements through the same provider — four quarters for the trailing-twelve-month window, four more for the year-on-year comparison, and three financial years for the table. Reported and expected EPS, and every gap and next-session move beside them, come from the earnings calendar and the daily bars respectively. The derived figures are marked computed where they appear: the margins, the P/E, the sales-to-market-cap ratio, the average absolute gap, the leg percentages, and the two comparisons against consensus in the calendar section.

No external sources, no models, no price targets. Nothing here came from an analyst note, a forecast or another site. Where the chart has no level to measure to — the space between $114.69 and $104.44 — this page says so rather than supplying a number. And where the figures support two opposite conclusions, as the 9.78× multiple does, both are stated and neither is chosen.