Tapestry vs Vera Bradley
TPR and VRA side by side, both in consumer discretionary. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How TPR and VRA compare
Tapestry is the larger company, worth 121 times as much as Vera Bradley ($26.4B against $218M).
Tapestry grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (13.7% versus −1.7% for Vera Bradley).
Tapestry keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 19.7% compared with −3.7% at Vera Bradley.
Tapestry pays a dividend yielding 1.3%; Vera Bradley does not pay one.
Tapestry scores higher on the StockData Score (19 against 9 for Vera Bradley), 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 | TPR | VRA |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $26.4B | $218M |
| Share price | $132.41 | $7.61 |
| Change, 1 year | 27.3% | 181% |
| Change, 5 years | 188% | −27.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.08 | 1.10 |
| Employees | 21K | 1,360 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 19 (better) | 9 |
| Valuation score | 1 | 1 |
| Growth score | 5 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 1 |
| Health score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 17.0× | – |
| P/S | 3.2× | 0.8× (better) |
| P/B | 76.7× | 1.6× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 13.0× | – |
| P/FCF | 14.0× | 7.4× (better) |
| PEG | 0.73 | – |
| FCF yield | 7.1% | 13.4% (better) |
| Fair value | $100.29 | $6.29 |
| Margin of safety | −32.0% | −21.0% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 13.7% (better) | −1.7% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 6.9% (better) | −10.5% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 494% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 542% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 19.8% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 78.3% (better) | 50.4% |
| Operating margin | 24.5% (better) | −3.6% |
| Net margin | 19.7% (better) | −3.7% |
| FCF margin | 23.0% (better) | 10.7% |
| Return on equity | 434% (better) | −7.4% |
| Return on invested capital | 74.3% (better) | −7.0% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 7.55 (better) | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.83 | – |
| Interest coverage | 17.0× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.24 | 2.44 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 4.11 (better) | 3.61 |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.3% | – |
| Payout ratio | 20.8% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 1 | – |
| Buyback yield | 5.5% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 6.8% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 99.7% | 37.4% |
| Held by insiders | 0.56% | 39.5% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$54.4M | $959K (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 8.5% | 7.1% |
Go deeper
- TPR stock overview
- TPR income statement
- TPR valuation and score
- VRA stock overview
- VRA income statement
- VRA valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.