UA vs PVH

For growth investors, PVH Corp.

(PVH) is the stronger pick with -6. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -9. 4% for Under Armour, Inc. (UA). 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 PVH Corp. (PVH) a "Buy" — based on 38 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 forward P/E, PVH Corp.

is actually cheaper at 8. 1x.

Over the past 5 years, PVH Corp.

(PVH) delivered a total return of -24. 8%, compared to -69. 3% for Under Armour, Inc. (UA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: PVH returned -1. 9% versus UA's -83. 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), Under Armour, Inc.

(UA) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 39β versus PVH Corp. 's 1. 48β — meaning PVH is approximately 7% more volatile than UA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, PVH Corp. (PVH) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 66% versus 69% for Under Armour, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), PVH Corp.

(PVH) is pulling ahead at -6. 1% versus -9. 4% for Under Armour, Inc. (UA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: PVH Corp. grew EPS -1. 9% year-over-year, compared to -190. 4% for Under Armour, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, PVH leads at -1. 9% 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.

PVH Corp.

(PVH) is the more profitable company, earning 6. 9% net margin versus -3. 9% for Under Armour, Inc. — meaning it keeps 6. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: PVH leads at 8. 5% versus -3. 6% for UA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — PVH leads at 59. 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.

On forward earnings alone, PVH Corp.

(PVH) trades at 8. 1x forward P/E versus 53. 7x for Under Armour, Inc. — 45. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for UA: 71. 7% to $10. 67.

In this comparison, PVH (0.

2% yield) pays a dividend. UA does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Under Armour, Inc.

(UA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding. Both have compounded well over 10 years (UA: -83. 8%, PVH: -1. 9%), 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: UA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; PVH is a small-cap deep-value stock. 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.