Apparel - Manufacturers
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CULP vs LEG vs MHK vs SNBR vs PRPL
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Furnishings, Fixtures & Appliances
Furnishings, Fixtures & Appliances
Furnishings, Fixtures & Appliances
Furnishings, Fixtures & Appliances
CULP vs LEG vs MHK vs SNBR vs PRPL — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Apparel - Manufacturers | Furnishings, Fixtures & Appliances | Furnishings, Fixtures & Appliances | Furnishings, Fixtures & Appliances | Furnishings, Fixtures & Appliances |
| Market Cap | $46M | $1.41B | $6.29B | $69M | $56M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $201M | $3.03B | $10.99B | $1M | $505M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-7M | $225M | $414M | $-132K | $-35M |
| Gross Margin | 13.0% | 23.7% | 24.3% | 59.0% | 40.9% |
| Operating Margin | 1.0% | 7.5% | 4.9% | -3.3% | -6.1% |
| Forward P/E | — | 9.6x | 11.2x | — | — |
| Total Debt | $18M | $1.66B | $2.76B | $354M | $204M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $6M | $587M | $856M | $2M | $24M |
CULP vs LEG vs MHK vs SNBR vs PRPL — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Culp, Inc. (CULP) | 100 | 46.7 | -53.3% |
| Leggett & Platt, In… (LEG) | 100 | 33.7 | -66.3% |
| Mohawk Industries, … (MHK) | 100 | 110.2 | +10.2% |
| Sleep Number Corpor… (SNBR) | 100 | 9.7 | -90.3% |
| Purple Innovation, … (PRPL) | 100 | 3.6 | -96.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CULP vs LEG vs MHK vs SNBR vs PRPL
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CULP is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Dividend streak 3 yrs, beta 0.71
- Lower volatility, beta 0.71, Low D/E 30.6%, current ratio 1.78x
- Beta 0.71, current ratio 1.78x
- Beta 0.71 vs SNBR's 2.70
LEG carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for value and quality.
- Better valuation composite
- 7.4% margin vs SNBR's -9.4%
- 1.9% yield; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
- +15.3% vs SNBR's -56.8%
MHK ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth -0.5%, EPS growth -27.1%, 3Y rev CAGR -2.8%
- -47.6% 10Y total return vs LEG's -52.6%
- -0.5% revenue growth vs SNBR's -99.9%
SNBR lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
Among these 5 stocks, PRPL doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | -0.5% revenue growth vs SNBR's -99.9% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 7.4% margin vs SNBR's -9.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.71 vs SNBR's 2.70 | |
| Dividends | 1.9% yield; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +15.3% vs SNBR's -56.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 6.3% ROA vs PRPL's -12.1%, ROIC 8.0% vs -15.8% |
CULP vs LEG vs MHK vs SNBR vs PRPL — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CULP vs LEG vs MHK vs SNBR vs PRPL — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
LEG leads in 3 of 6 categories
MHK leads 1 • CULP leads 1 • SNBR leads 0 • PRPL leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LEG leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MHK is the larger business by revenue, generating $11.0B annually — 7784.8x SNBR's $1M. LEG is the more profitable business, keeping 7.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to SNBR's -9.4%. On growth, PRPL holds the edge at +35.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $201M | $3.0B | $11.0B | $1M | $505M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $3M | $318M | $1.2B | $72M | -$12M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$7M | $225M | $414M | -$132,000 | -$35M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$11M | $207M | $709M | -$21M | -$15M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +13.0% | +23.7% | +24.3% | +59.0% | +40.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +1.0% | +7.5% | +4.9% | -3.3% | -6.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -3.6% | +7.4% | +3.8% | -9.4% | -7.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -5.7% | +6.8% | +6.5% | -14.6% | -3.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -8.2% | -100.0% | +8.0% | -3.8% | +35.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +18.2% | -36.4% | +65.2% | -11.2% | -55.6% |
Valuation Metrics
LEG leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 6.1x trailing earnings, LEG trades at a 65% valuation discount to MHK's 17.3x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, LEG's 6.8x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than MHK's 7.0x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $46M | $1.4B | $6.3B | $69M | $56M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $58M | $2.5B | $8.2B | $422M | $236M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -2.35x | 6.10x | 17.33x | -0.53x | -1.07x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 9.56x | 11.23x | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 6.83x | 7.05x | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.21x | 0.35x | 0.58x | 49.07x | 0.12x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.78x | 1.41x | 0.77x | — | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 5.00x | 10.20x | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
LEG leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LEG delivers a 23.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $23 in annual profit, vs $-13 for CULP. CULP carries lower financial leverage with a 0.31x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to LEG's 1.62x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), LEG scores 7/9 vs SNBR's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -13.3% | +23.1% | +5.0% | — | — |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -5.9% | +6.3% | +3.0% | -0.0% | -12.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -9.6% | +8.0% | +3.9% | -0.0% | -15.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -10.6% | +8.6% | +4.8% | — | -15.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 7 | 6 | 2 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.31x | 1.62x | 0.33x | — | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $12M | $1.1B | $1.9B | $353M | $180M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $6M | $587M | $856M | $2M | $24M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $18M | $1.7B | $2.8B | $354M | $204M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -39.03x | 4.40x | 36.90x | -780.16x | -0.32x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MHK leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MHK five years ago would be worth $4,472 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $169 for PRPL. Over the past 12 months, LEG leads with a +15.3% total return vs SNBR's -56.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MHK at 0.9% vs SNBR's -49.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +2.6% | -5.8% | -6.2% | -64.7% | -28.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -9.1% | +15.3% | +1.9% | -56.8% | -37.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -30.4% | -61.9% | +2.9% | -87.2% | -82.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -72.6% | -72.2% | -55.3% | -97.3% | -98.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -76.0% | -52.6% | -47.6% | -87.6% | -94.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -11.4% | -27.5% | +0.9% | -49.6% | -44.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CULP and LEG each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CULP is the less volatile stock with a 0.71 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than SNBR's 2.70 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. LEG currently trades 79.3% from its 52-week high vs SNBR's 21.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.71x | 1.55x | 1.34x | 2.70x | 1.08x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $4.80 | $13.00 | $143.13 | $13.94 | $1.26 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $2.93 | $7.86 | $93.60 | $1.07 | $0.47 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +75.0% | +79.3% | +71.8% | +21.7% | +40.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 66.8 | 56.9 | 50.6 | 53.4 | 36.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 29K | 2.5M | 1.1M | 2.8M | 322K |
Analyst Outlook
CULP leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: LEG as "Hold", MHK as "Hold", SNBR as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 230.0% upside for SNBR (target: $10) vs 16.4% for LEG (target: $12). LEG is the only dividend payer here at 1.88% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Hold | Hold | — |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $12.00 | $130.00 | $10.00 | — |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 14 | 32 | 11 | — |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.9% | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 3 | 0 | 0 | — | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.19 | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.1% | +0.2% | +2.4% | +1.8% | 0.0% |
LEG leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). MHK leads in 1 (Total Returns). 1 tied.
CULP vs LEG vs MHK vs SNBR vs PRPL: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CULP or LEG or MHK or SNBR or PRPL a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Mohawk Industries, Inc.
(MHK) is the stronger pick with -0. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -99. 9% for Sleep Number Corporation (SNBR). Leggett & Platt, Incorporated (LEG) offers the better valuation at 6. 1x trailing P/E (9. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Leggett & Platt, Incorporated (LEG) a "Hold" — based on 14 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.
02Which has the better valuation — CULP or LEG or MHK or SNBR or PRPL?
On trailing P/E, Leggett & Platt, Incorporated (LEG) is the cheapest at 6.
1x versus Mohawk Industries, Inc. at 17. 3x. On forward P/E, Leggett & Platt, Incorporated is actually cheaper at 9. 6x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CULP or LEG or MHK or SNBR or PRPL?
Over the past 5 years, Mohawk Industries, Inc.
(MHK) delivered a total return of -55. 3%, compared to -98. 3% for Purple Innovation, Inc. (PRPL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MHK returned -47. 6% versus PRPL's -94. 8%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — CULP or LEG or MHK or SNBR or PRPL?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Culp, Inc.
(CULP) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 71β versus Sleep Number Corporation's 2. 70β — meaning SNBR is approximately 278% more volatile than CULP relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Culp, Inc. (CULP) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 31% versus 162% for Leggett & Platt, Incorporated — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CULP or LEG or MHK or SNBR or PRPL?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Mohawk Industries, Inc.
(MHK) is pulling ahead at -0. 5% versus -99. 9% for Sleep Number Corporation (SNBR). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Leggett & Platt, Incorporated grew EPS 145. 3% year-over-year, compared to -541. 1% for Sleep Number Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, MHK leads at -2. 8% 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.
06Which has better profit margins — CULP or LEG or MHK or SNBR or PRPL?
Leggett & Platt, Incorporated (LEG) is the more profitable company, earning 5.
8% net margin versus -11. 0% for Purple Innovation, Inc. — meaning it keeps 5. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LEG leads at 5. 9% versus -6. 8% for PRPL. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — SNBR leads at 59. 0%, 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.
07Is CULP or LEG or MHK or SNBR or PRPL more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Leggett & Platt, Incorporated (LEG) trades at 9.
6x forward P/E versus 11. 2x for Mohawk Industries, Inc. — 1. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for SNBR: 230. 0% to $10. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — CULP or LEG or MHK or SNBR or PRPL?
In this comparison, LEG (1.
9% yield) pays a dividend. CULP, MHK, SNBR, PRPL do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CULP or LEG or MHK or SNBR or PRPL better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Culp, Inc.
(CULP) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 71)). Sleep Number Corporation (SNBR) carries a higher beta of 2. 70 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (CULP: -76. 0%, SNBR: -87. 6%), 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.
10What are the main differences between CULP and LEG and MHK and SNBR and PRPL?
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.
In terms of investment character: CULP is a small-cap quality compounder stock; LEG is a small-cap deep-value stock; MHK is a small-cap deep-value stock; SNBR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; PRPL is a small-cap quality compounder stock. LEG pays a dividend while CULP, MHK, SNBR, PRPL do 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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.