Apparel - Retail
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CURV vs CATO vs LB vs DXLG vs ANF
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Apparel - Retail
Oil & Gas Equipment & Services
Apparel - Retail
Apparel - Retail
CURV vs CATO vs LB vs DXLG vs ANF — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Apparel - Retail | Apparel - Retail | Oil & Gas Equipment & Services | Apparel - Retail | Apparel - Retail |
| Market Cap | $160M | $53M | $4.93B | $35M | $3.60B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.00B | $660M | $206M | $442M | $5.27B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-7M | $-10M | $41M | $-8M | $507M |
| Gross Margin | 34.8% | 32.2% | 69.1% | 44.4% | 58.6% |
| Operating Margin | 2.1% | -2.4% | 32.4% | -2.3% | 13.4% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 45.7x | — | 8.0x |
| Total Debt | $149M | $146M | $692K | $0.00 | $1.17B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $20M | $20M | $31M | $24M | $760M |
CURV vs CATO vs LB vs DXLG vs ANF — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Torrid Holdings Inc. (CURV) | 100 | 20.4 | -79.6% |
| The Cato Corporation (CATO) | 100 | 52.7 | -47.3% |
| LandBridge Company … (LB) | 100 | 276.3 | +176.3% |
| Destination XL Grou… (DXLG) | 100 | 17.6 | -82.4% |
| Abercrombie & Fitch… (ANF) | 100 | 44.1 | -55.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CURV vs CATO vs LB vs DXLG vs ANF
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CURV is the clearest fit if your priority is stability.
- Beta 0.46 vs DXLG's 2.30
CATO has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.88, yield 18.7%
- Beta 0.88, yield 18.7%, current ratio 1.19x
- 18.7% yield, vs LB's 3.6%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
- +27.5% vs CURV's -70.9%
LB is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Rev growth 81.1%, EPS growth 14.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 56.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.00, Low D/E 0.1%, current ratio 4.87x
- 81.1% revenue growth vs CURV's -9.4%
- 20.0% margin vs DXLG's -1.7%
Among these 5 stocks, DXLG doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
ANF ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding.
- 219.7% 10Y total return vs LB's 179.0%
- Better valuation composite
- 15.1% ROA vs CATO's -2.2%, ROIC 31.4% vs -6.7%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 81.1% revenue growth vs CURV's -9.4% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 20.0% margin vs DXLG's -1.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.46 vs DXLG's 2.30 | |
| Dividends | 18.7% yield, vs LB's 3.6%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +27.5% vs CURV's -70.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 15.1% ROA vs CATO's -2.2%, ROIC 31.4% vs -6.7% |
CURV vs CATO vs LB vs DXLG vs ANF — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CURV vs CATO vs LB vs DXLG vs ANF — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ANF leads in 3 of 6 categories
LB leads 1 • CURV leads 0 • CATO leads 0 • DXLG leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LB leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ANF is the larger business by revenue, generating $5.3B annually — 25.5x LB's $206M. LB is the more profitable business, keeping 20.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to DXLG's -1.7%. On growth, LB holds the edge at +16.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.0B | $660M | $206M | $442M | $5.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $75M | -$5M | $80M | $5M | $862M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$7M | -$10M | $41M | -$8M | $507M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$22M | -$7M | $166M | -$11M | $378M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +34.8% | +32.2% | +69.1% | +44.4% | +58.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +2.1% | -2.4% | +32.4% | -2.3% | +13.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -0.7% | -1.5% | +20.0% | -1.7% | +9.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -2.2% | -1.1% | +80.5% | -2.6% | +7.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -14.3% | +6.3% | +16.0% | -5.2% | +5.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -185.7% | +64.6% | -100.0% | -137.7% | +3.1% |
Valuation Metrics
ANF leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 7.5x trailing earnings, ANF trades at a 87% valuation discount to LB's 59.2x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, ANF's 4.7x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than LB's 37.7x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $160M | $53M | $4.9B | $35M | $3.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $290M | $178M | $4.9B | $11M | $4.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -21.86x | -3.01x | 59.23x | -0.97x | 7.51x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 45.71x | — | 7.98x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 13.53x | — | 37.71x | — | 4.68x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.16x | 0.08x | 24.77x | 0.08x | 0.68x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 0.35x | 2.24x | 0.32x | 2.68x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 40.41x | 18.82x | 9.52x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ANF leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ANF delivers a 38.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $39 in annual profit, vs $-6 for CATO. LB carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CATO's 0.90x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), LB scores 9/9 vs CATO's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | -5.8% | +5.5% | -5.5% | +38.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -1.7% | -2.2% | +3.4% | -1.9% | +15.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +22.5% | -6.7% | +10.4% | -6.8% | +31.4% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +11.4% | -9.6% | +10.1% | -6.4% | +30.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 2 | 9 | 3 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.90x | 0.00x | — | 0.82x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $129M | $126M | -$30M | -$24M | $409M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $20M | $20M | $31M | $24M | $760M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $149M | $146M | $692,000 | $0 | $1.2B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.84x | -1.77x | 2.90x | — | 302.38x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
ANF leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in LB five years ago would be worth $27,901 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $634 for CURV. Over the past 12 months, CATO leads with a +27.5% total return vs CURV's -70.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ANF at 49.9% vs DXLG's -47.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +44.3% | -2.7% | +32.3% | -28.9% | -36.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -70.9% | +27.5% | -17.4% | -35.6% | +12.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -60.1% | -52.4% | +179.0% | -85.6% | +237.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -93.7% | -60.4% | +179.0% | -55.2% | +92.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -93.7% | -72.3% | +179.0% | -88.1% | +219.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -26.4% | -21.9% | +40.8% | -47.6% | +49.9% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CURV and LB each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CURV is the less volatile stock with a 0.46 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than DXLG's 2.30 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. LB currently trades 73.0% from its 52-week high vs CURV's 25.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.46x | 0.88x | 1.00x | 2.30x | 1.42x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $6.08 | $4.92 | $87.60 | $1.69 | $133.11 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.94 | $2.26 | $43.75 | $0.43 | $65.45 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +25.2% | +59.3% | +73.0% | +37.9% | +59.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 35.2 | 48.6 | 45.0 | 58.2 | 33.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 852K | 60K | 390K | 144K | 1.2M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — CURV and CATO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CURV as "Hold", LB as "Buy", ANF as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 53.9% upside for ANF (target: $121) vs -1.3% for CURV (target: $2). For income investors, CATO offers the higher dividend yield at 18.71% vs LB's 3.58%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | — | Buy | — | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $1.51 | — | $73.33 | — | $120.80 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 10 | — | 52 | — | 55 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +18.7% | +3.6% | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.55 | $2.29 | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +7.4% | 0.0% | +39.2% | +12.5% |
ANF leads in 3 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). LB leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 2 tied.
CURV vs CATO vs LB vs DXLG vs ANF: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CURV or CATO or LB or DXLG or ANF a better buy right now?
For growth investors, LandBridge Company LLC (LB) is the stronger pick with 81.
1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -9. 4% for Torrid Holdings Inc. (CURV). Abercrombie & Fitch Co. (ANF) offers the better valuation at 7. 5x trailing P/E (8. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate LandBridge Company LLC (LB) a "Buy" — based on 52 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 — CURV or CATO or LB or DXLG or ANF?
On trailing P/E, Abercrombie & Fitch Co.
(ANF) is the cheapest at 7. 5x versus LandBridge Company LLC at 59. 2x. On forward P/E, Abercrombie & Fitch Co. is actually cheaper at 8. 0x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CURV or CATO or LB or DXLG or ANF?
Over the past 5 years, LandBridge Company LLC (LB) delivered a total return of +179.
0%, compared to -93. 7% for Torrid Holdings Inc. (CURV). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ANF returned +219. 7% versus CURV's -93. 7%. 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 — CURV or CATO or LB or DXLG or ANF?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Torrid Holdings Inc.
(CURV) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 46β versus Destination XL Group, Inc. 's 2. 30β — meaning DXLG is approximately 403% more volatile than CURV relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, LandBridge Company LLC (LB) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 90% for The Cato Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CURV or CATO or LB or DXLG or ANF?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), LandBridge Company LLC (LB) is pulling ahead at 81.
1% versus -9. 4% for Torrid Holdings Inc. (CURV). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: LandBridge Company LLC grew EPS 1398% year-over-year, compared to -1420. 0% for Destination XL Group, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, LB leads at 56. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — CURV or CATO or LB or DXLG or ANF?
LandBridge Company LLC (LB) is the more profitable company, earning 15.
1% net margin versus -8. 3% for Destination XL Group, Inc. — meaning it keeps 15. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LB leads at 59. 5% versus -4. 2% for DXLG. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — LB leads at 91. 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 CURV or CATO or LB or DXLG or ANF more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Abercrombie & Fitch Co.
(ANF) trades at 8. 0x forward P/E versus 45. 7x for LandBridge Company LLC — 37. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ANF: 53. 9% to $120. 80.
08Which pays a better dividend — CURV or CATO or LB or DXLG or ANF?
In this comparison, CATO (18.
7% yield), LB (3. 6% yield) pay a dividend. CURV, DXLG, ANF do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CURV or CATO or LB or DXLG or ANF better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, LandBridge Company LLC (LB) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1.
00), 3. 6% yield, +179. 0% 10Y return). Destination XL Group, Inc. (DXLG) carries a higher beta of 2. 30 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (LB: +179. 0%, DXLG: -88. 1%), 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 CURV and CATO and LB and DXLG and ANF?
These companies operate in different sectors (CURV (Consumer Cyclical) and CATO (Consumer Cyclical) and LB (Energy) and DXLG (Consumer Cyclical) and ANF (Consumer Cyclical)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: CURV is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CATO is a small-cap income-oriented stock; LB is a small-cap high-growth stock; DXLG is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ANF is a small-cap deep-value stock. CATO, LB pay a dividend while CURV, DXLG, ANF 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.