FIGS vs LULU vs NKE vs GOOS

For growth investors, FIGS, Inc.

(FIGS) is the stronger pick with 13. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -9. 8% for NIKE, Inc. (NKE). Lululemon Athletica Inc. (LULU) offers the better valuation at 10. 1x trailing P/E (10. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate FIGS, Inc. (FIGS) a "Buy" — based on 15 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 trailing P/E, Lululemon Athletica Inc.

(LULU) is the cheapest at 10. 1x versus FIGS, Inc. at 80. 9x. On forward P/E, Lululemon Athletica Inc. is actually cheaper at 10. 2x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Lululemon Athletica Inc. wins at 0. 42x versus NIKE, Inc. 's 4. 82x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, FIGS, Inc.

(FIGS) delivered a total return of -48. 8%, compared to -72. 5% for Canada Goose Holdings Inc. (GOOS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LULU returned +108. 6% versus FIGS's -48. 8%. 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), FIGS, Inc.

(FIGS) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 15β versus Lululemon Athletica Inc. 's 1. 61β — meaning LULU is approximately 40% more volatile than FIGS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, FIGS, Inc. (FIGS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 14% versus 133% for Canada Goose Holdings Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), FIGS, Inc.

(FIGS) is pulling ahead at 13. 6% versus -9. 8% for NIKE, Inc. (NKE). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: FIGS, Inc. grew EPS 1158% year-over-year, compared to -42. 1% for NIKE, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, LULU leads at 11. 0% 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.

Lululemon Athletica Inc.

(LULU) is the more profitable company, earning 14. 2% net margin versus 5. 4% for FIGS, Inc. — meaning it keeps 14. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LULU leads at 19. 9% versus 6. 0% for FIGS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — GOOS leads at 69. 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.

The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.

By this metric, Lululemon Athletica Inc. (LULU) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 42x versus NIKE, Inc. 's 4. 82x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Lululemon Athletica Inc. (LULU) trades at 10. 2x forward P/E versus 65. 0x for FIGS, Inc. — 54. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for GOOS: 62. 3% to $19. 33.

In this comparison, NKE (3.

5% yield) pays a dividend. FIGS, LULU, GOOS do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, NIKE, Inc.

(NKE) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 17), 3. 5% yield). Lululemon Athletica Inc. (LULU) carries a higher beta of 1. 61 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (NKE: -5. 2%, LULU: +108. 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.

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: FIGS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; LULU is a mid-cap deep-value stock; NKE is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; GOOS is a small-cap deep-value stock. NKE pays a dividend while FIGS, LULU, GOOS 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.