Apparel - Retail
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CURV vs LB vs TPL vs CATO vs VNOM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Oil & Gas Equipment & Services
Oil & Gas Exploration & Production
Apparel - Retail
Oil & Gas Midstream
CURV vs LB vs TPL vs CATO vs VNOM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Apparel - Retail | Oil & Gas Equipment & Services | Oil & Gas Exploration & Production | Apparel - Retail | Oil & Gas Midstream |
| Market Cap | $160M | $4.93B | $27.53B | $53M | $17.62B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.00B | $206M | $839M | $660M | $1.60B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-7M | $41M | $504M | $-10M | $-46M |
| Gross Margin | 34.8% | 69.1% | 74.5% | 32.2% | 46.3% |
| Operating Margin | 2.1% | 32.4% | 74.4% | -2.4% | 43.1% |
| Forward P/E | — | 45.7x | 41.8x | — | 20.7x |
| Total Debt | $149M | $692K | $32M | $146M | $2.19B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $20M | $31M | $145M | $20M | $13M |
CURV vs LB vs TPL vs CATO vs VNOM — 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% |
| LandBridge Company … (LB) | 100 | 276.3 | +176.3% |
| Texas Pacific Land … (TPL) | 100 | 54.4 | -45.6% |
| The Cato Corporation (CATO) | 100 | 52.7 | -47.3% |
| Viper Energy, Inc. (VNOM) | 100 | 125.2 | +25.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CURV vs LB vs TPL vs CATO vs VNOM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, CURV doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
LB ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 81.1%, EPS growth 14.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 56.7%
- 81.1% revenue growth vs CURV's -9.4%
TPL carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.31, Low D/E 2.2%, current ratio 4.40x
- 60.0% margin vs VNOM's -2.9%
- Beta 0.31 vs LB's 1.00
- 32.0% ROA vs CATO's -2.2%, ROIC 42.1% vs -6.7%
CATO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability is your priority.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.88, yield 18.7%
- 18.7% yield, vs TPL's 0.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
- +27.5% vs CURV's -70.9%
VNOM is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and defensive.
- 245.5% 10Y total return vs TPL's 7.5%
- Beta 0.38, yield 4.9%, current ratio 3.72x
- Better valuation composite
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 81.1% revenue growth vs CURV's -9.4% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 60.0% margin vs VNOM's -2.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.31 vs LB's 1.00 | |
| Dividends | 18.7% yield, vs TPL's 0.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +27.5% vs CURV's -70.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 32.0% ROA vs CATO's -2.2%, ROIC 42.1% vs -6.7% |
CURV vs LB vs TPL vs CATO vs VNOM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CURV vs LB vs TPL vs CATO vs VNOM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
TPL leads in 2 of 6 categories
LB leads 1 • CURV leads 0 • CATO leads 0 • VNOM leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TPL leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
VNOM is the larger business by revenue, generating $1.6B annually — 7.8x LB's $206M. TPL is the more profitable business, keeping 60.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to VNOM's -2.9%. On growth, VNOM holds the edge at +102.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.0B | $206M | $839M | $660M | $1.6B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $75M | $80M | $689M | -$5M | $1.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$7M | $41M | $504M | -$10M | -$46M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$22M | $166M | $493M | -$7M | -$4.4B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +34.8% | +69.1% | +74.5% | +32.2% | +46.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +2.1% | +32.4% | +74.4% | -2.4% | +43.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -0.7% | +20.0% | +60.0% | -1.5% | -2.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -2.2% | +80.5% | +58.8% | -1.1% | -2.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -14.3% | +16.0% | +20.8% | +6.3% | +102.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -185.7% | -100.0% | +18.5% | +64.6% | -14.5% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — CATO and VNOM each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 57.3x trailing earnings, TPL trades at a 3% valuation discount to LB's 59.2x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, CURV's 13.5x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than TPL's 41.9x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $160M | $4.9B | $27.5B | $53M | $17.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $290M | $4.9B | $27.4B | $178M | $19.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -21.86x | 59.23x | 57.30x | -3.01x | -97.88x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 45.71x | 41.77x | — | 20.74x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 2.54x | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 13.53x | 37.71x | 41.88x | — | 16.69x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.16x | 24.77x | 34.49x | 0.08x | 13.09x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 2.24x | 18.90x | 0.35x | 0.65x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 40.41x | 56.61x | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
TPL leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
TPL delivers a 35.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $36 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 | — | +5.5% | +35.5% | -5.8% | -0.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -1.7% | +3.4% | +32.0% | -2.2% | -0.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +22.5% | +10.4% | +42.1% | -6.7% | +5.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +11.4% | +10.1% | +43.3% | -9.6% | +6.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 9 | 5 | 2 | 3 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.00x | 0.02x | 0.90x | 0.21x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $129M | -$30M | -$112M | $126M | $2.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $20M | $31M | $145M | $20M | $13M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $149M | $692,000 | $32M | $146M | $2.2B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.84x | 2.90x | 446.42x | -1.77x | 2.67x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LB leads this category, winning 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in VNOM five years ago would be worth $30,312 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 LB at 40.8% vs CURV's -26.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +44.3% | +32.3% | +34.2% | -2.7% | +22.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -70.9% | -17.4% | -70.1% | +27.5% | +25.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -60.1% | +179.0% | -11.8% | -52.4% | +98.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -93.7% | +179.0% | -28.8% | -60.4% | +203.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -93.7% | +179.0% | +748.3% | -72.3% | +245.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -26.4% | +40.8% | -4.1% | -21.9% | +25.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — TPL and VNOM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
TPL is the less volatile stock with a 0.31 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LB's 1.00 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. VNOM currently trades 91.9% 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 | 1.00x | 0.31x | 0.88x | 0.38x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $6.08 | $87.60 | $1432.18 | $4.92 | $51.13 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.94 | $43.75 | $280.95 | $2.26 | $35.10 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +25.2% | +73.0% | +27.9% | +59.3% | +91.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 35.2 | 45.0 | 39.1 | 48.6 | 50.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 852K | 390K | 468K | 60K | 2.9M |
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", TPL as "Buy", VNOM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 60.0% upside for TPL (target: $639) vs -1.3% for CURV (target: $2). For income investors, CATO offers the higher dividend yield at 18.71% vs TPL's 0.54%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy | — | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $1.51 | $73.33 | $639.00 | — | $54.20 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 10 | 52 | 5 | — | 42 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +3.6% | +0.5% | +18.7% | +4.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $2.29 | $2.14 | $0.55 | $2.30 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.1% | +7.4% | +1.1% |
TPL leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). LB leads in 1 (Total Returns). 3 tied.
CURV vs LB vs TPL vs CATO vs VNOM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CURV or LB or TPL or CATO or VNOM 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). Texas Pacific Land Corporation (TPL) offers the better valuation at 57. 3x trailing P/E (41. 8x 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 LB or TPL or CATO or VNOM?
On trailing P/E, Texas Pacific Land Corporation (TPL) is the cheapest at 57.
3x versus LandBridge Company LLC at 59. 2x. On forward P/E, Viper Energy, Inc. is actually cheaper at 20. 7x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CURV or LB or TPL or CATO or VNOM?
Over the past 5 years, Viper Energy, Inc.
(VNOM) delivered a total return of +203. 1%, compared to -93. 7% for Torrid Holdings Inc. (CURV). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: TPL returned +748. 3% 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 LB or TPL or CATO or VNOM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Texas Pacific Land Corporation (TPL) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
31β versus LandBridge Company LLC's 1. 00β — meaning LB is approximately 221% more volatile than TPL 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 LB or TPL or CATO or VNOM?
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 -146. 7% for Torrid Holdings 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 LB or TPL or CATO or VNOM?
Texas Pacific Land Corporation (TPL) is the more profitable company, earning 60.
3% net margin versus -5. 1% for Viper Energy, Inc. — meaning it keeps 60. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: TPL leads at 74. 2% versus -4. 2% for CATO. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — TPL leads at 100. 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 LB or TPL or CATO or VNOM more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Viper Energy, Inc.
(VNOM) trades at 20. 7x forward P/E versus 45. 7x for LandBridge Company LLC — 25. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for TPL: 60. 0% to $639. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — CURV or LB or TPL or CATO or VNOM?
In this comparison, CATO (18.
7% yield), VNOM (4. 9% yield), LB (3. 6% yield), TPL (0. 5% yield) pay a dividend. CURV does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CURV or LB or TPL or CATO or VNOM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Texas Pacific Land Corporation (TPL) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
31), 0. 5% yield, +748. 3% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (TPL: +748. 3%, CURV: -93. 7%), 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 LB and TPL and CATO and VNOM?
These companies operate in different sectors (CURV (Consumer Cyclical) and LB (Energy) and TPL (Energy) and CATO (Consumer Cyclical) and VNOM (Energy)), 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; LB is a small-cap high-growth stock; TPL is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; CATO is a small-cap income-oriented stock; VNOM is a mid-cap high-growth stock. LB, TPL, CATO, VNOM pay a dividend while CURV 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.
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.