Compare Stocks

5 / 10
Try these comparisons:

Stock Comparison

GOOS vs NKE vs RL vs UAA vs PVH

Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.

Live fundamentals10-year financials5-year price chart
GOOS
Canada Goose Holdings Inc.

Apparel - Manufacturers

Consumer CyclicalNYSE • CA
Market Cap$550M
5Y Perf.-38.9%
NKE
NIKE, Inc.

Apparel - Footwear & Accessories

Consumer CyclicalNYSE • US
Market Cap$52.57B
5Y Perf.-55.2%
RL
Ralph Lauren Corporation

Apparel - Manufacturers

Consumer CyclicalNYSE • US
Market Cap$48.53B
5Y Perf.+374.7%
UAA
Under Armour, Inc.

Apparel - Manufacturers

Consumer CyclicalNYSE • US
Market Cap$1.30B
5Y Perf.-26.5%
PVH
PVH Corp.

Apparel - Manufacturers

Consumer CyclicalNYSE • US
Market Cap$4.10B
5Y Perf.+96.8%

GOOS vs NKE vs RL vs UAA vs PVH — Key Financials

Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.

Company Snapshot
GOOS logoGOOS
NKE logoNKE
RL logoRL
UAA logoUAA
PVH logoPVH
IndustryApparel - ManufacturersApparel - Footwear & AccessoriesApparel - ManufacturersApparel - ManufacturersApparel - Manufacturers
Market Cap$550M$52.57B$48.53B$1.30B$4.10B
Revenue (TTM)$1.46B$46.51B$7.83B$4.98B$8.78B
Net Income (TTM)$22M$2.52B$919M$-520M$469M
Gross Margin70.2%41.1%69.6%46.6%58.2%
Operating Margin5.4%6.5%15.0%-2.5%7.4%
Forward P/E14.9x29.6x22.0x55.4x8.2x
Total Debt$743M$11.02B$2.67B$1.30B$3.39B
Cash & Equiv.$334M$7.46B$1.92B$501M$748M

GOOS vs NKE vs RL vs UAA vs PVHLong-Term Stock Performance

Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.

GOOS
NKE
RL
UAA
PVH
StockMay 20May 26Return
Canada Goose Holdin… (GOOS)10061.1-38.9%
NIKE, Inc. (NKE)10044.8-55.2%
Ralph Lauren Corpor… (RL)100474.7+374.7%
Under Armour, Inc. (UAA)10073.5-26.5%
PVH Corp. (PVH)100196.8+96.8%

Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.

Quick Verdict: GOOS vs NKE vs RL vs UAA vs PVH

Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.

Bottom line: RL leads in 4 of 7 categories (5-stock set), making it the strongest pick for growth and revenue expansion and profitability and margin quality. NIKE, Inc. is the stronger pick specifically for capital preservation and lower volatility and dividend income and shareholder returns. PVH also leads in specific categories worth noting. As sector peers, any of these can serve as alternatives in the same allocation.
GOOS
Canada Goose Holdings Inc.
The Growth Play

GOOS is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.

  • Rev growth 1.1%, EPS growth 70.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 7.1%
Best for: growth exposure
NKE
NIKE, Inc.
The Income Pick

NKE is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.

  • Dividend streak 23 yrs, beta 1.14, yield 3.5%
  • Lower volatility, beta 1.14, Low D/E 83.4%, current ratio 2.21x
  • Beta 1.14, yield 3.5%, current ratio 2.21x
  • Beta 1.14 vs RL's 1.53, lower leverage
Best for: income & stability and sleep-well-at-night
RL
Ralph Lauren Corporation
The Long-Run Compounder

RL carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding.

  • 324.6% 10Y total return vs PVH's -1.0%
  • 6.7% revenue growth vs NKE's -9.8%
  • 11.7% margin vs UAA's -10.4%
  • +44.0% vs NKE's -22.3%
Best for: long-term compounding
UAA
Under Armour, Inc.
The Consumer Cyclical Pick

Among these 5 stocks, UAA doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.

Best for: consumer cyclical exposure
PVH
PVH Corp.
The Value Pick

PVH ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.

  • PEG 0.60 vs NKE's 4.79
  • Lower P/E (8.2x vs 55.4x)
Best for: valuation efficiency
See the full category breakdown
CategoryWinnerWhy
GrowthRL logoRL6.7% revenue growth vs NKE's -9.8%
ValuePVH logoPVHLower P/E (8.2x vs 55.4x)
Quality / MarginsRL logoRL11.7% margin vs UAA's -10.4%
Stability / SafetyNKE logoNKEBeta 1.14 vs RL's 1.53, lower leverage
DividendsNKE logoNKE3.5% yield, 23-year raise streak, vs RL's 0.9%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
Momentum (1Y)RL logoRL+44.0% vs NKE's -22.3%
Efficiency (ROA)RL logoRL11.8% ROA vs UAA's -11.2%, ROIC 20.6% vs -5.1%

GOOS vs NKE vs RL vs UAA vs PVH — Revenue Breakdown by Segment

How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units

GOOSCanada Goose Holdings Inc.

Segment breakdown not available.

NKENIKE, Inc.
FY 2025
Footwear
66.9%$31.0B
Apparel
33.0%$15.3B
Product and Service, Other
0.2%$74M
RLRalph Lauren Corporation
FY 2020
Other Non-Reportable Segment-Related
100.0%$370M
UAAUnder Armour, Inc.
FY 2025
Apparel
66.8%$3.5B
Footwear
23.4%$1.2B
Accessories
8.0%$411M
License
1.8%$95M
PVHPVH Corp.
FY 2024
Product
95.8%$8.2B
Royalty
4.2%$361M

GOOS vs NKE vs RL vs UAA vs PVH — Financial Metrics

Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.

BEST OVERALLRLLAGGINGUAA

Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)

GOOS leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.

NKE is the larger business by revenue, generating $46.5B annually — 31.9x GOOS's $1.5B. RL is the more profitable business, keeping 11.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to UAA's -10.4%. On growth, GOOS holds the edge at +14.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.

MetricGOOS logoGOOSCanada Goose Hold…NKE logoNKENIKE, Inc.RL logoRLRalph Lauren Corp…UAA logoUAAUnder Armour, Inc.PVH logoPVHPVH Corp.
RevenueTrailing 12 months$1.5B$46.5B$7.8B$5.0B$8.8B
EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax$185M$3.7B$1.4B-$4M$924M
Net IncomeAfter-tax profit$22M$2.5B$919M-$520M$469M
Free Cash FlowCash after capex$186M$2.5B$695M-$46M$516M
Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue+70.2%+41.1%+69.6%+46.6%+58.2%
Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue+5.4%+6.5%+15.0%-2.5%+7.4%
Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue+1.5%+5.4%+11.7%-10.4%+5.3%
FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue+12.7%+5.3%+8.9%-0.9%+5.9%
Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year+14.2%+0.6%+12.2%-5.2%+4.5%
EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year-4.2%-30.8%+24.7%+65.0%
GOOS leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.

Valuation Metrics

PVH leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.

At 8.5x trailing earnings, PVH trades at a 73% valuation discount to RL's 30.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), PVH offers better value at 0.62x vs NKE's 3.30x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.

MetricGOOS logoGOOSCanada Goose Hold…NKE logoNKENIKE, Inc.RL logoRLRalph Lauren Corp…UAA logoUAAUnder Armour, Inc.PVH logoPVHPVH Corp.
Market CapShares × price$550M$52.6B$48.5B$1.3B$4.1B
Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash$849M$56.1B$49.3B$2.1B$6.7B
Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS16.79x20.44x30.87x-13.68x8.47x
Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est.14.87x29.60x21.98x55.43x8.20x
PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate3.30x1.67x0.62x
EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple5.55x12.44x42.79x6.65x
Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue0.56x1.14x6.86x0.25x0.47x
Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share2.87x4.97x8.86x1.47x0.99x
Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF2.74x16.09x47.63x7.04x
PVH leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.

Profitability & Efficiency

RL leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.

RL delivers a 31.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $32 in annual profit, vs $-36 for UAA. PVH carries lower financial leverage with a 0.66x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to GOOS's 1.33x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), GOOS scores 8/9 vs UAA's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.

MetricGOOS logoGOOSCanada Goose Hold…NKE logoNKENIKE, Inc.RL logoRLRalph Lauren Corp…UAA logoUAAUnder Armour, Inc.PVH logoPVHPVH Corp.
ROE (TTM)Return on equity+3.7%+17.9%+31.8%-36.2%+9.6%
ROA (TTM)Return on assets+1.2%+6.7%+11.8%-11.2%+4.0%
ROICReturn on invested capital+12.5%+16.7%+20.6%-5.1%+7.0%
ROCEReturn on capital employed+13.3%+13.8%+18.6%-5.5%+8.8%
Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–985857
Debt / EquityFinancial leverage1.33x0.83x1.03x0.69x0.66x
Net DebtTotal debt minus cash$408M$3.6B$746M$798M$2.6B
Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets$334M$7.5B$1.9B$501M$748M
Total DebtShort + long-term debt$743M$11.0B$2.7B$1.3B$3.4B
Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense1.96x10.45x23.25x-5.74x2.42x
RL leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.

Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)

RL leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.

A $10,000 investment in RL five years ago would be worth $27,197 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,744 for GOOS. Over the past 12 months, RL leads with a +44.0% total return vs NKE's -22.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors RL at 48.8% vs NKE's -27.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.

MetricGOOS logoGOOSCanada Goose Hold…NKE logoNKENIKE, Inc.RL logoRLRalph Lauren Corp…UAA logoUAAUnder Armour, Inc.PVH logoPVHPVH Corp.
YTD ReturnYear-to-date-11.8%-29.6%-0.9%+21.6%+32.0%
1-Year ReturnPast 12 months+38.1%-22.3%+44.0%+8.2%+18.6%
3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends-42.0%-61.6%+229.7%-25.7%+8.7%
5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends-72.6%-62.5%+172.0%-72.3%-21.6%
10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends-25.9%-5.6%+324.6%-83.4%-1.0%
CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return-16.6%-27.3%+48.8%-9.4%+2.8%
RL leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.

Risk & Volatility

Evenly matched — NKE and RL each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

NKE is the less volatile stock with a 1.14 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than RL's 1.53 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. RL currently trades 91.1% from its 52-week high vs NKE's 55.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.

MetricGOOS logoGOOSCanada Goose Hold…NKE logoNKENIKE, Inc.RL logoRLRalph Lauren Corp…UAA logoUAAUnder Armour, Inc.PVH logoPVHPVH Corp.
Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 5001.35x1.14x1.53x1.35x1.50x
52-Week HighHighest price in past year$15.43$80.17$393.41$8.14$100.15
52-Week LowLowest price in past year$8.40$42.09$246.08$4.13$59.60
% of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak+77.3%+55.1%+91.1%+78.9%+89.3%
RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–10058.140.244.552.353.0
Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded378K20.9M534K8.1M1.1M
Evenly matched — NKE and RL each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst Outlook

NKE leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst consensus: GOOS as "Hold", NKE as "Buy", RL as "Buy", UAA as "Hold", PVH as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 62.2% upside for GOOS (target: $19) vs 11.8% for PVH (target: $100). For income investors, NKE offers the higher dividend yield at 3.50% vs PVH's 0.17%.

MetricGOOS logoGOOSCanada Goose Hold…NKE logoNKENIKE, Inc.RL logoRLRalph Lauren Corp…UAA logoUAAUnder Armour, Inc.PVH logoPVHPVH Corp.
Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sellHoldBuyBuyHoldBuy
Price TargetConsensus 12-month target$19.33$68.71$429.13$7.43$100.00
# AnalystsCovering analysts1771487338
Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price+3.5%+0.9%+0.2%
Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises123400
Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS$1.55$3.14$0.15
Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap0.0%+5.7%+1.0%+6.9%+12.8%
NKE leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Key Takeaway

RL leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). GOOS leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 1 tied.

Best OverallRalph Lauren Corporation (RL)Leads 2 of 6 categories
Loading custom metrics...

GOOS vs NKE vs RL vs UAA vs PVH: Key Questions Answered

10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily

01

Is GOOS or NKE or RL or UAA or PVH a better buy right now?

For growth investors, Ralph Lauren Corporation (RL) is the stronger pick with 6.

7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -9. 8% for NIKE, Inc. (NKE). PVH Corp. (PVH) offers the better valuation at 8. 5x trailing P/E (8. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate NIKE, Inc. (NKE) a "Buy" — based on 71 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.

02

Which has the better valuation — GOOS or NKE or RL or UAA or PVH?

On trailing P/E, PVH Corp.

(PVH) is the cheapest at 8. 5x versus Ralph Lauren Corporation at 30. 9x. On forward P/E, PVH Corp. is actually cheaper at 8. 2x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: PVH Corp. wins at 0. 60x versus NIKE, Inc. 's 4. 79x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

03

Which is the better long-term investment — GOOS or NKE or RL or UAA or PVH?

Over the past 5 years, Ralph Lauren Corporation (RL) delivered a total return of +172.

0%, compared to -72. 6% for Canada Goose Holdings Inc. (GOOS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: RL returned +324. 6% versus UAA's -83. 4%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

04

Which is safer — GOOS or NKE or RL or UAA or PVH?

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), NIKE, Inc.

(NKE) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 14β versus Ralph Lauren Corporation's 1. 53β — meaning RL is approximately 33% more volatile than NKE relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, PVH Corp. (PVH) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 66% versus 133% for Canada Goose Holdings Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

05

Which is growing faster — GOOS or NKE or RL or UAA or PVH?

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Ralph Lauren Corporation (RL) is pulling ahead at 6.

7% versus -9. 8% for NIKE, Inc. (NKE). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Canada Goose Holdings Inc. grew EPS 70. 2% year-over-year, compared to -190. 4% for Under Armour, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, GOOS leads at 7. 1% 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.

06

Which has better profit margins — GOOS or NKE or RL or UAA or PVH?

Ralph Lauren Corporation (RL) is the more profitable company, earning 10.

5% net margin versus -3. 9% for Under Armour, Inc. — meaning it keeps 10. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: RL leads at 13. 2% versus -3. 6% for UAA. 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.

07

Is GOOS or NKE or RL or UAA or PVH more undervalued right now?

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, PVH Corp. (PVH) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 60x versus NIKE, Inc. 's 4. 79x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, PVH Corp. (PVH) trades at 8. 2x forward P/E versus 55. 4x for Under Armour, Inc. — 47. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for GOOS: 62. 2% to $19. 33.

08

Which pays a better dividend — GOOS or NKE or RL or UAA or PVH?

In this comparison, NKE (3.

5% yield), RL (0. 9% yield), PVH (0. 2% yield) pay a dividend. GOOS, UAA do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

09

Is GOOS or NKE or RL or UAA or PVH better for a retirement portfolio?

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. 14), 3. 5% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (NKE: -5. 6%, PVH: -1. 0%), 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.

10

What are the main differences between GOOS and NKE and RL and UAA and PVH?

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: GOOS is a small-cap deep-value stock; NKE is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; RL is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; UAA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; PVH is a small-cap deep-value stock. NKE, RL pay a dividend while GOOS, UAA, PVH 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.

Stocks Like

GOOS

Quality Business

  • Sector: Consumer Cyclical
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 7%
  • Gross Margin > 42%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

NKE

Income & Dividend Stock

  • Sector: Consumer Cyclical
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Net Margin > 5%
  • Dividend Yield > 1.4%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

RL

Stable Dividend Mega-Cap

  • Sector: Consumer Cyclical
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 6%
  • Net Margin > 7%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

UAA

Quality Business

  • Sector: Consumer Cyclical
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Gross Margin > 27%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

PVH

Quality Business

  • Sector: Consumer Cyclical
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Net Margin > 5%
Run This Screen
Custom Screen

Beat Both

Find stocks that outperform GOOS and NKE and RL and UAA and PVH on the metrics below

Revenue Growth>
%
(GOOS: 14.2% · NKE: 0.6%)
P/E Ratio<
x
(GOOS: 16.8x · NKE: 20.4x)

You Might Also Compare

Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.