UAA vs COLM

For growth investors, Columbia Sportswear Company (COLM) is the stronger pick with 0.

8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -9. 4% for Under Armour, Inc. (UAA). Columbia Sportswear Company (COLM) offers the better valuation at 19. 5x trailing P/E (18. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Under Armour, Inc. (UAA) a "Hold" — based on 73 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.

On forward P/E, Columbia Sportswear Company is actually cheaper at 18.

3x.

Over the past 5 years, Columbia Sportswear Company (COLM) delivered a total return of -36.

1%, compared to -73. 9% for Under Armour, Inc. (UAA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: COLM returned +25. 9% versus UAA's -83. 5%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Columbia Sportswear Company (COLM) is the lower-risk stock at 1.

17β versus Under Armour, Inc. 's 1. 36β — meaning UAA is approximately 17% more volatile than COLM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Columbia Sportswear Company (COLM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 51% versus 69% for Under Armour, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Columbia Sportswear Company (COLM) is pulling ahead at 0.

8% versus -9. 4% for Under Armour, Inc. (UAA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Columbia Sportswear Company grew EPS -15. 2% year-over-year, compared to -190. 4% for Under Armour, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, COLM leads at -0. 7% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.

Columbia Sportswear Company (COLM) is the more profitable company, earning 5.

2% net margin versus -3. 9% for Under Armour, Inc. — meaning it keeps 5. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: COLM leads at 6. 0% versus -3. 6% for UAA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — COLM leads at 50. 2%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.

On forward earnings alone, Columbia Sportswear Company (COLM) trades at 18.

3x forward P/E versus 55. 0x for Under Armour, Inc. — 36. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for UAA: 16. 4% to $7. 43.

In this comparison, COLM (1.

9% yield) pays a dividend. UAA does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Columbia Sportswear Company (COLM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1.

17), 1. 9% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (COLM: +25. 9%, UAA: -83. 5%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.

Both stocks operate in the Consumer Cyclical sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

COLM pays a dividend while UAA does not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.