Lanvin vs Ping An Biomedical
LANV and PASW side by side, both in apparel and other finished products made from fabrics and similar materials. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How LANV and PASW compare
Lanvin grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (−17.6% versus −61.0% for Ping An Biomedical).
Ping An Biomedical keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of −37.6% compared with −99.2% at Lanvin.
Ping An Biomedical scores higher on the StockData Score (2 against 0 for Lanvin), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | LANV | PASW |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Share price | $0.720 | $1.36 |
| Change, 1 year | −64.5% | −94.4% |
| Change, 5 years | −92.6% | – |
| Beta (5Y) | −0.02 | – |
| Employees | 2,066 | 7 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 0 | 0 |
| Performance score | 0 | 0 |
| Health score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −17.6% (better) | −61.0% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 1.6% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 58.2% (better) | 2.8% |
| Operating margin | −96.3% | −43.1% (better) |
| Net margin | −99.2% | −37.6% (better) |
| Return on equity | – | −38.6% |
| Return on invested capital | −42.6% | −29.2% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 0.13 |
| Interest coverage | −6.5× (better) | −47.9× |
| Current ratio | 0.20 | 2.54 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 3 | 3 |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by insiders | 72.4% | 10.3% |
Go deeper
- LANV stock overview
- LANV income statement
- LANV valuation and score
- PASW stock overview
- PASW income statement
- PASW valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.