PVH vs Tapestry
PVH and TPR side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How PVH and TPR compare
Tapestry is the larger company, worth 5.6 times as much as PVH ($23.2B against $4.2B).
Tapestry grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (14.2% versus 1.6% for PVH).
Tapestry keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 19.1% compared with −1.9% at PVH.
Both pay dividends: PVH yields 0.17% and Tapestry 1.4%.
Tapestry scores higher on the StockData Score (19 against 7 for PVH), 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 | PVH | TPR |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $4.2B | $23.2B |
| Share price | $90.19 | $116.29 |
| Change, 1 year | 12.0% | 3.0% |
| Change, 5 years | −26.6% | 174% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.42 | 1.13 |
| Employees | 26K | 21K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 7 | 19 (better) |
| Valuation score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 1 | 5 (better) |
| Performance score | 0 | 6 (better) |
| Health score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Dividend score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 16.0× |
| P/S | 0.5× (better) | 2.9× |
| P/B | 0.9× (better) | 33.5× |
| EV/EBITDA | 8.8× (better) | 11.8× |
| P/FCF | 5.8× (better) | 12.8× |
| PEG | – | 0.69 |
| FCF yield | 17.2% (better) | 7.8% |
| Fair value | $105.47 | $95.67 |
| Margin of safety | 14.5% (better) | −21.5% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 1.6% | 14.2% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.6% | 6.9% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −136% | 734% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 787% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 19.8% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 58.8% | 77.8% (better) |
| Operating margin | 4.1% | 23.9% (better) |
| Net margin | −1.9% | 19.1% (better) |
| FCF margin | 8.0% | 22.6% (better) |
| Return on equity | −3.5% | 197% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 2.8% | 76.9% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.47 (better) | 3.46 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.07 | 0.60 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 4.0× | 16.0× (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.65 | 1.75 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.16 | 4.01 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 8 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.17% | 1.4% (better) |
| Payout ratio | – | 21.3% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 32.0% | – |
| Buyback yield | 0.42% | 6.7% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 0.59% | 8.1% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 111% | 99.7% |
| Held by insiders | 1.9% | 0.66% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $358K (better) | −$48.4M |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 10.8% | 7.9% |
Go deeper
- PVH stock overview
- PVH income statement
- PVH valuation and score
- TPR stock overview
- TPR income statement
- TPR valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.