Crocs vs Deckers Outdoor
CROX and DECK side by side, both in rubber and miscellaneous plastics products. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CROX and DECK compare
Deckers Outdoor is the larger company, worth 1.6 times as much as Crocs ($11.8B against $7.3B).
On earnings, Deckers Outdoor is cheaper: it trades at 11.7× trailing earnings, against 11.9× for Crocs.
Deckers Outdoor grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (6.3% versus 0.70% for Crocs).
Deckers Outdoor keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 19.0% compared with 16.2% at Crocs.
Deckers Outdoor scores higher on the StockData Score (20 against 14 for Crocs), 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 | CROX | DECK |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $7.3B | $11.8B |
| Share price | $159.98 | $88.38 |
| Change, 1 year | 116% | 10.7% |
| Change, 5 years | −8.8% | 22.0% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.25 | 1.00 |
| Employees | 8,010 | 6,000 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 14 | 20 (better) |
| Valuation score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Health score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 11.9× | 11.7× (better) |
| P/S | 1.8× (better) | 2.1× |
| P/B | 5.4× | 5.1× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 8.4× | 7.6× (better) |
| P/FCF | 9.7× (better) | 11.2× |
| PEG | – | 0.40 |
| FCF yield | 10.3% (better) | 8.9% |
| Fair value | $212.63 | $148.10 |
| Margin of safety | 24.8% | 40.3% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 0.70% | 6.3% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 23.9% (better) | 16.5% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 264% (better) | 4.4% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 337% (better) | 11.7% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 25.6% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 59.4% (better) | 58.9% |
| Operating margin | 22.6% | 23.6% (better) |
| Net margin | 16.2% | 19.0% (better) |
| FCF margin | 18.4% | 18.9% (better) |
| Return on equity | 49.1% (better) | 44.3% |
| Return on invested capital | 29.0% | 96.1% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.96 (better) | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.12 | – |
| Interest coverage | 11.5× | 280× (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.44 | 2.72 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 4.58 | 8.15 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Buyback yield | 9.4% | 10.6% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 9.4% | 10.6% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 106% | 100% |
| Held by insiders | 5.1% | 0.90% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$22.4M | −$1.0M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 5 (better) | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 10.0% | 8.3% |
Go deeper
- CROX stock overview
- CROX income statement
- CROX valuation and score
- DECK stock overview
- DECK income statement
- DECK valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.