Luxury Goods
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
LANV vs CPRI vs TPR vs RL vs PVH
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Luxury Goods
Luxury Goods
Apparel - Manufacturers
Apparel - Manufacturers
LANV vs CPRI vs TPR vs RL vs PVH — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Luxury Goods | Luxury Goods | Luxury Goods | Apparel - Manufacturers | Apparel - Manufacturers |
| Market Cap | $196M | $2.23B | $26.71B | $47.87B | $4.06B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $291M | $3.71B | $7.85B | $7.83B | $8.78B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-181M | $-504M | $663M | $919M | $469M |
| Gross Margin | 53.7% | 61.4% | 76.2% | 69.6% | 58.2% |
| Operating Margin | -59.8% | -1.8% | 11.3% | 15.0% | 7.4% |
| Forward P/E | — | 13.4x | 20.1x | 21.7x | 8.1x |
| Total Debt | $338M | $3.10B | $3.90B | $2.67B | $3.39B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $18M | $166M | $1.10B | $1.92B | $748M |
LANV vs CPRI vs TPR vs RL vs PVH — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Mar 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lanvin Group Holdin… (LANV) | 100 | 17.1 | -82.9% |
| Capri Holdings Limi… (CPRI) | 100 | 36.6 | -63.4% |
| Tapestry, Inc. (TPR) | 100 | 316.7 | +216.7% |
| Ralph Lauren Corpor… (RL) | 100 | 287.1 | +187.1% |
| PVH Corp. (PVH) | 100 | 83.8 | -16.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LANV vs CPRI vs TPR vs RL vs PVH
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LANV lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
Among these 5 stocks, CPRI doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
TPR is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if defensive is your priority.
- Beta 1.53, yield 1.0%, current ratio 1.87x
- 1.0% yield, vs RL's 0.9%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
- +76.7% vs LANV's -24.7%
RL carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 4 yrs, beta 1.50, yield 0.9%
- Rev growth 6.7%, EPS growth 19.4%, 3Y rev CAGR 4.4%
- 319.2% 10Y total return vs TPR's 249.3%
- 6.7% revenue growth vs LANV's -22.9%
PVH ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night and valuation efficiency.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.48, Low D/E 66.0%, current ratio 1.27x
- PEG 0.60 vs RL's 1.18
- Lower P/E (8.1x vs 21.7x), PEG 0.60 vs 1.18
- Beta 1.48 vs CPRI's 2.03, lower leverage
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 6.7% revenue growth vs LANV's -22.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (8.1x vs 21.7x), PEG 0.60 vs 1.18 | |
| Quality / Margins | 11.7% margin vs LANV's -62.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.48 vs CPRI's 2.03, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.0% yield, vs RL's 0.9%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +76.7% vs LANV's -24.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 11.8% ROA vs LANV's -30.2%, ROIC 20.6% vs -36.7% |
LANV vs CPRI vs TPR vs RL vs PVH — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
LANV vs CPRI vs TPR vs RL vs PVH — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
TPR leads in 2 of 6 categories
PVH leads 1 • RL leads 1 • LANV leads 0 • CPRI leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TPR leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
PVH is the larger business by revenue, generating $8.8B annually — 30.2x LANV's $291M. RL is the more profitable business, keeping 11.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to LANV's -62.2%. On growth, TPR holds the edge at +21.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $291M | $3.7B | $7.9B | $7.8B | $8.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$163M | $72M | $1.0B | $1.4B | $924M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$181M | -$504M | $663M | $919M | $469M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$106M | $491M | $1.8B | $695M | $516M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +53.7% | +61.4% | +76.2% | +69.6% | +58.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -59.8% | -1.8% | +11.3% | +15.0% | +7.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -62.2% | -13.6% | +8.4% | +11.7% | +5.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -36.3% | +13.2% | +22.4% | +8.9% | +5.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -22.0% | -18.7% | +21.2% | +12.2% | +4.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -29.2% | +120.8% | +73.7% | +24.7% | +65.0% |
Valuation Metrics
PVH leads this category, winning 6 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 8.4x trailing earnings, PVH trades at a 95% valuation discount to TPR's 159.2x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), PVH offers better value at 0.62x vs RL's 1.65x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $196M | $2.2B | $26.7B | $47.9B | $4.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $571M | $5.2B | $29.5B | $48.6B | $6.7B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -1.01x | -1.87x | 159.17x | 30.45x | 8.39x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 13.36x | 20.06x | 21.72x | 8.12x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 1.65x | 0.62x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 46.12x | 42.21x | 6.61x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.51x | 0.50x | 3.81x | 6.76x | 0.47x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 5.94x | 33.85x | 8.74x | 0.98x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 14.55x | 24.42x | 46.98x | 6.97x |
Profitability & Efficiency
RL leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
TPR delivers a 106.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $106 in annual profit, vs $-5 for CPRI. PVH carries lower financial leverage with a 0.66x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CPRI's 8.34x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), RL scores 8/9 vs LANV's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -2.5% | -4.7% | +106.4% | +31.8% | +9.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -30.2% | -15.1% | +10.2% | +11.8% | +4.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -36.7% | -13.6% | +6.8% | +20.6% | +7.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -52.3% | -17.0% | +5.0% | +18.6% | +8.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 4 | 7 | 8 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 8.34x | 4.55x | 1.03x | 0.66x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $320M | $2.9B | $2.8B | $746M | $2.6B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $18M | $166M | $1.1B | $1.9B | $748M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $338M | $3.1B | $3.9B | $2.7B | $3.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -3.89x | — | 15.58x | 23.25x | 2.42x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
TPR leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in TPR five years ago would be worth $27,834 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,703 for LANV. Over the past 12 months, TPR leads with a +76.7% total return vs LANV's -24.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors TPR at 51.9% vs LANV's -30.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -24.0% | -23.4% | +1.4% | -2.2% | +30.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -24.7% | +18.4% | +76.7% | +48.6% | +24.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -66.6% | -50.5% | +250.6% | +225.3% | +7.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -83.0% | -68.6% | +178.3% | +164.4% | -24.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -83.0% | -63.1% | +249.3% | +319.2% | -1.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -30.6% | -20.9% | +51.9% | +48.2% | +2.5% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — LANV and RL each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
LANV is the less volatile stock with a -0.34 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CPRI's 2.03 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. RL currently trades 89.9% from its 52-week high vs LANV's 62.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -0.34x | 2.03x | 1.53x | 1.50x | 1.48x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $2.69 | $28.27 | $161.97 | $393.41 | $100.15 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.03 | $15.37 | $73.65 | $237.83 | $59.60 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +62.2% | +66.1% | +80.6% | +89.9% | +88.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 55.1 | 47.3 | 54.2 | 54.8 | 60.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 44K | 2.5M | 1.8M | 532K | 1.1M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — TPR and RL each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: LANV as "Hold", CPRI as "Hold", TPR as "Buy", RL as "Buy", PVH as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 288.8% upside for LANV (target: $7) vs 12.8% for PVH (target: $100). For income investors, TPR offers the higher dividend yield at 1.03% vs PVH's 0.17%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $6.50 | $25.33 | $162.38 | $428.75 | $100.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 1 | 53 | 41 | 48 | 38 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +1.0% | +0.9% | +0.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 0 | 4 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $1.35 | $3.14 | $0.15 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.2% | +7.6% | +1.0% | +12.9% |
TPR leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). PVH leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
LANV vs CPRI vs TPR vs RL vs PVH: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LANV or CPRI or TPR or RL 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 -22. 9% for Lanvin Group Holdings Limited (LANV). PVH Corp. (PVH) offers the better valuation at 8. 4x trailing P/E (8. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Tapestry, Inc. (TPR) a "Buy" — based on 41 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 — LANV or CPRI or TPR or RL or PVH?
On trailing P/E, PVH Corp.
(PVH) is the cheapest at 8. 4x versus Tapestry, Inc. at 159. 2x. On forward P/E, PVH Corp. is actually cheaper at 8. 1x. 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 Ralph Lauren Corporation's 1. 18x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — LANV or CPRI or TPR or RL or PVH?
Over the past 5 years, Tapestry, Inc.
(TPR) delivered a total return of +178. 3%, compared to -83. 0% for Lanvin Group Holdings Limited (LANV). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: RL returned +319. 2% versus LANV's -83. 0%. 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 — LANV or CPRI or TPR or RL or PVH?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Lanvin Group Holdings Limited (LANV) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
34β versus Capri Holdings Limited's 2. 03β — meaning CPRI is approximately -702% more volatile than LANV relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, PVH Corp. (PVH) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 66% versus 8% for Capri Holdings Limited — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — LANV or CPRI or TPR or RL or PVH?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Ralph Lauren Corporation (RL) is pulling ahead at 6.
7% versus -22. 9% for Lanvin Group Holdings Limited (LANV). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Ralph Lauren Corporation grew EPS 19. 4% year-over-year, compared to -76. 6% for Tapestry, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, RL leads at 4. 4% 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 — LANV or CPRI or TPR or RL or PVH?
Ralph Lauren Corporation (RL) is the more profitable company, earning 10.
5% net margin versus -50. 3% for Lanvin Group Holdings Limited — 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 -47. 6% for LANV. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — TPR leads at 75. 4%, 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 LANV or CPRI or TPR or RL 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 Ralph Lauren Corporation's 1. 18x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, PVH Corp. (PVH) trades at 8. 1x forward P/E versus 21. 7x for Ralph Lauren Corporation — 13. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LANV: 288. 8% to $6. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — LANV or CPRI or TPR or RL or PVH?
In this comparison, TPR (1.
0% yield), RL (0. 9% yield), PVH (0. 2% yield) pay a dividend. LANV, CPRI do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is LANV or CPRI or TPR or RL or PVH better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Lanvin Group Holdings Limited (LANV) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
34)). Capri Holdings Limited (CPRI) carries a higher beta of 2. 03 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (LANV: -83. 0%, CPRI: -63. 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 LANV and CPRI and TPR and RL 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: LANV is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CPRI is a small-cap quality compounder stock; TPR is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; RL is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; PVH is a small-cap deep-value stock. TPR, RL pay a dividend while LANV, CPRI, 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.