Ralph Lauren vs V F
RL and VFC 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 RL and VFC compare
Ralph Lauren is the larger company, worth 2.9 times as much as V F ($23.5B against $8.2B).
On earnings, V F is cheaper: it trades at 22.5× trailing earnings, against 22.6× for Ralph Lauren.
Ralph Lauren grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (12.8% versus −1.4% for V F).
Ralph Lauren keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 12.6% compared with 3.9% at V F.
Both pay dividends: Ralph Lauren yields 0.97% and V F 1.7%.
Ralph Lauren scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 13 for V F), 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 | RL | VFC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $23.5B | $8.2B |
| Share price | $394.05 | $20.74 |
| Change, 1 year | 17.7% | 41.7% |
| Change, 5 years | 223% | −72.7% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.12 | 1.28 |
| Employees | 24K | 26K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 16 (better) | 13 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Growth score | 4 | 4 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 2 |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend score | 2 | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 22.6× | 22.5× (better) |
| P/S | 2.7× | 0.9× (better) |
| P/B | 8.6× | 4.0× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 14.3× | 12.5× (better) |
| PEG | 0.87 | 0.82 (better) |
| Fair value | $296.78 | $19.33 |
| Margin of safety | −32.8% | −7.3% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 12.8% (better) | −1.4% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 13.0% (better) | 0.78% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 25.5% | 309% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 28.8% | 300% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | −9.3% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 71.8% (better) | 55.9% |
| Operating margin | 16.0% (better) | 6.8% |
| Net margin | 12.6% (better) | 3.9% |
| Return on equity | 40.4% (better) | 21.1% |
| Return on invested capital | 49.6% (better) | 9.9% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.45 (better) | 1.74 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.36 | 3.45 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 26.0× (better) | 4.7× |
| Current ratio | 1.97 (better) | 1.47 |
| Altman Z-score | 6.40 (better) | 1.85 |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 7 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.97% | 1.7% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 21.0% | 38.2% |
| Years of dividend growth | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | −28.6% |
| Buyback yield | 3.5% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 4.4% (better) | 1.7% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 65.8% | 101% |
| Held by insiders | 57.0% | 1.3% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$124M | $1.2M (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 8.8% | 8.9% |
Go deeper
- RL stock overview
- RL income statement
- RL valuation and score
- VFC stock overview
- VFC income statement
- VFC valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.