Apparel - Manufacturers
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
CULP vs UFI vs MHK vs APOG
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Apparel - Manufacturers
Furnishings, Fixtures & Appliances
Construction
CULP vs UFI vs MHK vs APOG — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Apparel - Manufacturers | Apparel - Manufacturers | Furnishings, Fixtures & Appliances | Construction |
| Market Cap | $46M | $75M | $6.29B | $787M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $201M | $555M | $10.99B | $1.40B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-7M | $-40M | $414M | $54M |
| Gross Margin | 13.0% | 3.5% | 24.3% | 22.7% |
| Operating Margin | 1.0% | -6.2% | 4.9% | 6.7% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 11.2x | 10.6x |
| Total Debt | $18M | $116M | $2.76B | $286M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $6M | $23M | $856M | $40M |
CULP vs UFI vs MHK vs APOG — 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% |
| Unifi, Inc. (UFI) | 100 | 29.4 | -70.6% |
| Mohawk Industries, … (MHK) | 100 | 110.2 | +10.2% |
| Apogee Enterprises,… (APOG) | 100 | 177.1 | +77.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CULP vs UFI vs MHK vs APOG
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CULP is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 3 yrs, beta 0.71
UFI is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night and defensive is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.31, Low D/E 46.4%, current ratio 3.32x
- Beta 0.31, current ratio 3.32x
- Beta 0.31 vs MHK's 1.34
MHK is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +1.9% vs UFI's -12.6%
APOG carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 3.2%, EPS growth -35.2%, 3Y rev CAGR -0.8%
- 10.5% 10Y total return vs MHK's -47.6%
- 3.2% revenue growth vs CULP's -5.4%
- Lower P/E (10.6x vs 11.2x)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 3.2% revenue growth vs CULP's -5.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (10.6x vs 11.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 3.9% margin vs UFI's -7.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.31 vs MHK's 1.34 | |
| Dividends | 2.8% yield; 14-year raise streak; the other 3 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +1.9% vs UFI's -12.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 4.8% ROA vs UFI's -9.8%, ROIC 8.1% vs -2.1% |
CULP vs UFI vs MHK vs APOG — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CULP vs UFI vs MHK vs APOG — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
APOG leads in 3 of 6 categories
UFI leads 1 • MHK leads 1 • CULP leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
APOG leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MHK is the larger business by revenue, generating $11.0B annually — 54.8x CULP's $201M. APOG is the more profitable business, keeping 3.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to UFI's -7.2%. On growth, MHK holds the edge at +8.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $201M | $555M | $11.0B | $1.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $3M | -$16M | $1.2B | $57M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$7M | -$40M | $414M | $54M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$11M | $15M | $709M | $95M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +13.0% | +3.5% | +24.3% | +22.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +1.0% | -6.2% | +4.9% | +6.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -3.6% | -7.2% | +3.8% | +3.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -5.7% | +2.8% | +6.5% | +6.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -8.2% | -11.3% | +8.0% | +1.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +18.2% | +87.0% | +65.2% | +6.1% |
Valuation Metrics
UFI leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 14.5x trailing earnings, APOG trades at a 16% valuation discount to MHK's 17.3x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, MHK's 7.0x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than APOG's 21.9x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $46M | $75M | $6.3B | $787M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $58M | $168M | $8.2B | $1.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -2.35x | -3.64x | 17.33x | 14.52x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 11.23x | 10.64x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 0.43x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 10.67x | 7.05x | 21.95x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.21x | 0.13x | 0.58x | 0.56x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.78x | 0.30x | 0.77x | 1.53x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 10.20x | 8.27x |
Profitability & Efficiency
APOG leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
APOG delivers a 10.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $11 in annual profit, vs $-17 for UFI. CULP carries lower financial leverage with a 0.31x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to APOG's 0.56x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), APOG scores 7/9 vs UFI's 1/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -13.3% | -16.7% | +5.0% | +10.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -5.9% | -9.8% | +3.0% | +4.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -9.6% | -2.1% | +3.9% | +8.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -10.6% | -2.7% | +4.8% | +9.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.31x | 0.46x | 0.33x | 0.56x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $12M | $93M | $1.9B | $247M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $6M | $23M | $856M | $40M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $18M | $116M | $2.8B | $286M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -39.03x | -4.43x | 36.90x | 5.97x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MHK leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in APOG five years ago would be worth $11,292 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,465 for UFI. Over the past 12 months, MHK leads with a +1.9% total return vs UFI's -12.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MHK at 0.9% vs UFI's -21.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +2.6% | +15.4% | -6.2% | -1.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -9.1% | -12.6% | +1.9% | -2.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -30.4% | -52.4% | +2.9% | -0.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -72.6% | -85.3% | -55.3% | +12.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -76.0% | -84.1% | -47.6% | +10.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -11.4% | -21.9% | +0.9% | -0.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CULP and UFI each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
UFI is the less volatile stock with a 0.31 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than MHK's 1.34 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CULP currently trades 75.0% from its 52-week high vs MHK's 71.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.71x | 0.31x | 1.34x | 1.25x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $4.80 | $5.42 | $143.13 | $49.99 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $2.93 | $2.96 | $93.60 | $30.75 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +75.0% | +74.5% | +71.8% | +73.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 66.8 | 61.9 | 50.6 | 53.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 29K | 28K | 1.1M | 253K |
Analyst Outlook
APOG leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: MHK as "Hold", APOG as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 92.7% upside for APOG (target: $71) vs 26.5% for MHK (target: $130). APOG is the only dividend payer here at 2.83% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | — | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | — | $130.00 | $70.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | — | 32 | 6 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +2.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 3 | 2 | 0 | 14 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $1.04 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.1% | +0.2% | +2.4% | +1.9% |
APOG leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). UFI leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
CULP vs UFI vs MHK vs APOG: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CULP or UFI or MHK or APOG a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Apogee Enterprises, Inc.
(APOG) is the stronger pick with 3. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -5. 4% for Culp, Inc. (CULP). Apogee Enterprises, Inc. (APOG) offers the better valuation at 14. 5x trailing P/E (10. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Mohawk Industries, Inc. (MHK) a "Hold" — based on 32 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 UFI or MHK or APOG?
On trailing P/E, Apogee Enterprises, Inc.
(APOG) is the cheapest at 14. 5x versus Mohawk Industries, Inc. at 17. 3x. On forward P/E, Apogee Enterprises, Inc. is actually cheaper at 10. 6x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CULP or UFI or MHK or APOG?
Over the past 5 years, Apogee Enterprises, Inc.
(APOG) delivered a total return of +12. 9%, compared to -85. 3% for Unifi, Inc. (UFI). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: APOG returned +10. 5% versus UFI's -84. 1%. 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 UFI or MHK or APOG?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Unifi, Inc.
(UFI) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 31β versus Mohawk Industries, Inc. 's 1. 34β — meaning MHK is approximately 330% more volatile than UFI relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Culp, Inc. (CULP) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 31% versus 56% for Apogee Enterprises, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CULP or UFI or MHK or APOG?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Apogee Enterprises, Inc.
(APOG) is pulling ahead at 3. 2% versus -5. 4% for Culp, Inc. (CULP). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Unifi, Inc. grew EPS 57. 5% year-over-year, compared to -37. 8% for Culp, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, APOG leads at -0. 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 UFI or MHK or APOG?
Apogee Enterprises, Inc.
(APOG) is the more profitable company, earning 3. 9% net margin versus -9. 0% for Culp, Inc. — meaning it keeps 3. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: APOG leads at 6. 0% versus -4. 2% for CULP. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MHK leads at 23. 9%, 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 UFI or MHK or APOG more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Apogee Enterprises, Inc.
(APOG) trades at 10. 6x forward P/E versus 11. 2x for Mohawk Industries, Inc. — 0. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for APOG: 92. 7% to $70. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — CULP or UFI or MHK or APOG?
In this comparison, APOG (2.
8% yield) pays a dividend. CULP, UFI, MHK do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CULP or UFI or MHK or APOG better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Unifi, Inc.
(UFI) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 31)). Both have compounded well over 10 years (UFI: -84. 1%, MHK: -47. 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 UFI and MHK and APOG?
These companies operate in different sectors (CULP (Consumer Cyclical) and UFI (Consumer Cyclical) and MHK (Consumer Cyclical) and APOG (Industrials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: CULP is a small-cap quality compounder stock; UFI is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MHK is a small-cap deep-value stock; APOG is a small-cap deep-value stock. APOG pays a dividend while CULP, UFI, MHK 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.