Apparel - Manufacturers
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
OXM vs RL vs PVH vs HBI vs GH
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Apparel - Manufacturers
Apparel - Manufacturers
Apparel - Manufacturers
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
OXM vs RL vs PVH vs HBI vs GH — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Apparel - Manufacturers | Apparel - Manufacturers | Apparel - Manufacturers | Apparel - Manufacturers | Medical - Diagnostics & Research |
| Market Cap | $675M | $47.87B | $4.06B | $2.29B | $12.10B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.49B | $7.83B | $8.78B | $3.44B | $1.08B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-3M | $919M | $469M | $330M | $-433M |
| Gross Margin | 61.7% | 69.6% | 58.2% | 42.0% | 64.9% |
| Operating Margin | -0.2% | 15.0% | 7.4% | 13.1% | -41.4% |
| Forward P/E | 20.3x | 21.7x | 8.1x | 9.8x | — |
| Total Debt | $449M | $2.67B | $3.39B | $2.55B | $1.68B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $9M | $1.92B | $748M | $215M | $378M |
OXM vs RL vs PVH vs HBI vs GH — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oxford Industries, … (OXM) | 100 | 106.5 | +6.5% |
| Ralph Lauren Corpor… (RL) | 100 | 468.2 | +368.2% |
| PVH Corp. (PVH) | 100 | 194.9 | +94.9% |
| Hanesbrands Inc. (HBI) | 100 | 65.6 | -34.4% |
| Guardant Health, In… (GH) | 100 | 102.1 | +2.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: OXM vs RL vs PVH vs HBI vs GH
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
OXM ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability.
- Dividend streak 4 yrs, beta 1.68, yield 6.0%
- 6.0% yield, 4-year raise streak, vs RL's 0.9%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
RL is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 319.2% 10Y total return vs GH's 186.5%
- 11.7% margin vs GH's -40.1%
- 11.8% ROA vs GH's -26.5%, ROIC 20.6% vs -34.9%
PVH is the clearest fit if your priority is 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 OXM's 2.64
- Better valuation composite
Among these 5 stocks, HBI doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
GH carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and defensive.
- Rev growth 32.9%, EPS growth 6.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 29.8%
- Beta 0.86, current ratio 4.84x
- 32.9% revenue growth vs PVH's -6.1%
- Beta 0.86 vs HBI's 1.72
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 32.9% revenue growth vs PVH's -6.1% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 11.7% margin vs GH's -40.1% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.86 vs HBI's 1.72 | |
| Dividends | 6.0% yield, 4-year raise streak, vs RL's 0.9%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +132.2% vs OXM's -9.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 11.8% ROA vs GH's -26.5%, ROIC 20.6% vs -34.9% |
OXM vs RL vs PVH vs HBI vs GH — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
OXM vs RL vs PVH vs HBI vs GH — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
RL leads in 2 of 6 categories
PVH leads 1 • GH leads 1 • OXM leads 1 • HBI leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
RL leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
PVH is the larger business by revenue, generating $8.8B annually — 8.1x GH's $1.1B. RL is the more profitable business, keeping 11.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to GH's -40.1%. On growth, GH holds the edge at +48.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.5B | $7.8B | $8.8B | $3.4B | $1.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $64M | $1.4B | $924M | $496M | -$418M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$3M | $919M | $469M | $330M | -$433M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $26M | $695M | $516M | -$8M | -$225M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +61.7% | +69.6% | +58.2% | +42.0% | +64.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -0.2% | +15.0% | +7.4% | +13.1% | -41.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -0.2% | +11.7% | +5.3% | +9.6% | -40.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +1.7% | +8.9% | +5.9% | -0.2% | -20.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -0.2% | +12.2% | +4.5% | -4.8% | +48.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -16.1% | +24.7% | +65.0% | +8.0% | -10.4% |
Valuation Metrics
PVH leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 7.7x trailing earnings, OXM trades at a 75% valuation discount to RL's 30.5x 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 | $675M | $47.9B | $4.1B | $2.3B | $12.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.1B | $48.6B | $6.7B | $4.6B | $13.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 7.73x | 30.45x | 8.39x | -7.11x | -27.79x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 20.32x | 21.72x | 8.12x | 9.82x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 1.00x | 1.65x | 0.62x | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 5.96x | 42.21x | 6.61x | 16.64x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.45x | 6.76x | 0.47x | 0.65x | 12.32x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.15x | 8.74x | 0.98x | 66.99x | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 11.29x | 46.98x | 6.97x | 10.11x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
RL leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
HBI delivers a 73.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $74 in annual profit, vs $-1 for OXM. PVH carries lower financial leverage with a 0.66x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to HBI's 75.02x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), RL scores 8/9 vs HBI's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -0.6% | +31.8% | +9.6% | +73.9% | — |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -0.2% | +11.8% | +4.0% | +7.7% | -26.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +9.1% | +20.6% | +7.0% | +4.5% | -34.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +12.5% | +18.6% | +8.8% | +5.4% | -29.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 8 | 7 | 4 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.72x | 1.03x | 0.66x | 75.02x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $440M | $746M | $2.6B | $2.3B | $1.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $9M | $1.9B | $748M | $215M | $378M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $449M | $2.7B | $3.4B | $2.6B | $1.7B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -0.55x | 23.25x | 2.42x | 2.15x | -181.67x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
GH leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in RL five years ago would be worth $26,443 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,362 for HBI. Over the past 12 months, GH leads with a +132.2% total return vs OXM's -9.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors GH at 57.7% vs OXM's -20.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +30.3% | -2.2% | +30.7% | — | -9.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -9.4% | +48.6% | +24.6% | +32.3% | +132.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -49.3% | +225.3% | +7.7% | +49.1% | +292.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -39.3% | +164.4% | -24.8% | -66.4% | -31.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +2.4% | +319.2% | -1.9% | -62.6% | +186.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -20.3% | +48.2% | +2.5% | +14.2% | +57.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — HBI and GH each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
GH is the less volatile stock with a 0.86 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than HBI's 1.72 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. HBI currently trades 91.8% from its 52-week high vs OXM's 75.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.68x | 1.50x | 1.48x | 1.72x | 0.86x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $60.31 | $393.41 | $100.15 | $7.05 | $120.74 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $30.57 | $237.83 | $59.60 | $3.96 | $36.36 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +75.2% | +89.9% | +88.5% | +91.8% | +76.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 59.9 | 54.8 | 60.3 | 44.3 | 55.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 308K | 532K | 1.1M | 104.2M | 1.9M |
Analyst Outlook
OXM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: OXM as "Buy", RL as "Buy", PVH as "Buy", HBI as "Buy", GH as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 44.3% upside for GH (target: $133) vs -23.6% for OXM (target: $35). For income investors, OXM offers the higher dividend yield at 6.02% vs PVH's 0.17%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $34.67 | $428.75 | $100.00 | $7.25 | $133.14 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 21 | 48 | 38 | 34 | 30 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +6.0% | +0.9% | +0.2% | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 4 | 4 | 0 | 1 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $2.73 | $3.14 | $0.15 | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.0% | +12.9% | 0.0% | +0.1% |
RL leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). PVH leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
OXM vs RL vs PVH vs HBI vs GH: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is OXM or RL or PVH or HBI or GH a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Guardant Health, Inc.
(GH) is the stronger pick with 32. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -6. 1% for PVH Corp. (PVH). Oxford Industries, Inc. (OXM) offers the better valuation at 7. 7x trailing P/E (20. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Oxford Industries, Inc. (OXM) a "Buy" — based on 21 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 — OXM or RL or PVH or HBI or GH?
On trailing P/E, Oxford Industries, Inc.
(OXM) is the cheapest at 7. 7x versus Ralph Lauren Corporation at 30. 5x. On forward P/E, PVH Corp. is actually cheaper at 8. 1x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. 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 Oxford Industries, Inc. 's 2. 64x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — OXM or RL or PVH or HBI or GH?
Over the past 5 years, Ralph Lauren Corporation (RL) delivered a total return of +164.
4%, compared to -66. 4% for Hanesbrands Inc. (HBI). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: RL returned +319. 2% versus HBI's -62. 6%. 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 — OXM or RL or PVH or HBI or GH?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Guardant Health, Inc.
(GH) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 86β versus Hanesbrands Inc. 's 1. 72β — meaning HBI is approximately 99% more volatile than GH relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, PVH Corp. (PVH) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 66% versus 75% for Hanesbrands Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — OXM or RL or PVH or HBI or GH?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Guardant Health, Inc.
(GH) is pulling ahead at 32. 9% versus -6. 1% for PVH Corp. (PVH). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Oxford Industries, Inc. grew EPS 53. 7% year-over-year, compared to -1698. 4% for Hanesbrands Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, GH leads at 29. 8% 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 — OXM or RL or PVH or HBI or GH?
Ralph Lauren Corporation (RL) is the more profitable company, earning 10.
5% net margin versus -42. 4% for Guardant Health, 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 -44. 4% for GH. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — RL leads at 68. 6%, 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 OXM or RL or PVH or HBI or GH 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 Oxford Industries, Inc. 's 2. 64x. 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 GH: 44. 3% to $133. 14.
08Which pays a better dividend — OXM or RL or PVH or HBI or GH?
In this comparison, OXM (6.
0% yield), RL (0. 9% yield), PVH (0. 2% yield) pay a dividend. HBI, GH do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is OXM or RL or PVH or HBI or GH better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Ralph Lauren Corporation (RL) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (0.
9% yield, +319. 2% 10Y return). Hanesbrands Inc. (HBI) carries a higher beta of 1. 72 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (RL: +319. 2%, HBI: -62. 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.
10What are the main differences between OXM and RL and PVH and HBI and GH?
These companies operate in different sectors (OXM (Consumer Cyclical) and RL (Consumer Cyclical) and PVH (Consumer Cyclical) and HBI (Consumer Cyclical) and GH (Healthcare)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: OXM is a small-cap deep-value stock; RL is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; PVH is a small-cap deep-value stock; HBI is a small-cap quality compounder stock; GH is a mid-cap high-growth stock. OXM, RL pay a dividend while PVH, HBI, GH 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.