Steven Madden vs Tapestry
SHOO and TPR side by side, both in consumer discretionary. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How SHOO and TPR compare
Tapestry is the larger company, worth 7.3 times as much as Steven Madden ($23.2B against $3.2B).
Steven Madden grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (18.2% versus 14.2% for Tapestry).
Both pay dividends: Steven Madden yields 1.9% and Tapestry 1.4%.
Tapestry scores higher on the StockData Score (19 against 10 for Steven Madden), 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 | SHOO | TPR |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $3.2B | $23.2B |
| Share price | $43.50 | $116.29 |
| Change, 1 year | 26.4% | 3.0% |
| Change, 5 years | −12.6% | 174% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.16 | 1.13 |
| Employees | 6,300 | 21K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 10 | 19 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Growth score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Performance score | 1 | 6 (better) |
| Health score | 4 | 4 |
| Dividend score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 16.0× |
| P/S | 1.2× (better) | 2.9× |
| P/B | 3.4× (better) | 33.5× |
| EV/EBITDA | 13.7× | 11.8× (better) |
| P/FCF | 14.2× | 12.8× (better) |
| PEG | – | 0.69 |
| FCF yield | 7.0% | 7.8% (better) |
| Fair value | $31.98 | $95.67 |
| Margin of safety | −36.0% | −21.5% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 18.2% (better) | 14.2% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 16.1% (better) | 6.9% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 734% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 787% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 19.8% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 46.1% | 77.8% (better) |
| Operating margin | 7.5% | 23.9% (better) |
| Net margin | – | 19.1% |
| FCF margin | 8.2% | 22.6% (better) |
| Return on equity | – | 197% |
| Return on invested capital | 15.1% | 76.9% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.13 (better) | 3.46 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.51 (better) | 0.60 |
| Interest coverage | – | 16.0× |
| Current ratio | 1.91 (better) | 1.75 |
| Altman Z-score | 5.76 (better) | 4.01 |
| Piotroski F-score | – | 8 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.9% (better) | 1.4% |
| Payout ratio | – | 21.3% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 41.1% | – |
| Buyback yield | 0.43% | 6.7% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 2.4% | 8.1% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 100% | 99.7% |
| Held by insiders | 2.3% | 0.66% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$4.0M (better) | −$48.4M |
| Short interest, % of float | 6.3% | 7.9% |
Go deeper
- SHOO stock overview
- SHOO income statement
- SHOO 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.