Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. ANF scored 73.6, LULU scored 47.9 — ANF leads.
Compare another set
ANF
Abercrombie & Fitch Co.
Apparel Retail · Quality-Growth
73.6
$142.58 · $6.1B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
25.7
ANF leads
LULU
lululemon athletica inc.
Apparel Retail · Quality-Growth
47.9
$94.50 · $10.9B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestLULU7.8x
Fastest growthANF+6.4%
Strongest balance sheetLULU0.45
Highest qualityLULU89 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueLULU-46%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
ANF
stronger →← stronger
LULU
84
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
89
67
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
23
71
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
55
ANF is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
ANF
LULU
$566mC+
FCF
$1.4bC+
+6.4%C+
Rev
+1.7%C
0.94B
D/E
0.45B+
12.2xA-
P/E
7.8xA
3.62D
PEG
—
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
ANF
LULU
32% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
46% below
~-4%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-12%/yr
+41%
1-yr DCF upside
+92%
+46%
5-yr DCF upside
+87%
+54%
10-yr DCF upside
+80%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
ANF
Why this score
Buying back stock
Durable high returns
LULU
Why this score
Buying back stock
Durable high returns
The companies
ANFAbercrombie & Fitch Co.
Apparel Retail · $142.58 · beta 1.01
Why now
Apparel Retail · market cap $6.1b. 8% off the 52-week high of $155.22. 11 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $163.55 (implying +15% upside).
Moat
ROE 41% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 106% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Value re-rating depends on a catalyst. Without one — analyst day, divestiture, margin recovery, capital return — the stock can stay cheap on these multiples for years.
LULUlululemon athletica inc.
Apparel Retail · $94.50 · beta 0.92
Why now
Apparel Retail · market cap $10.9b. Down 58% from 52-week high of $225.98 — deep drawdown territory. 27 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $104.91 (implying +11% upside).
Moat
Net margin 13% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 30% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 96% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Down 58% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
Generating verdict… typically 5–10 seconds
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where ANF and LULU diverge
On the headline score the gap is 25.7 points in favor of ANF. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
GrowthANF 67.1 · LULU 22.5ANF +44.6
ValueANF 70.7 · LULU 54.6ANF +16.1
QualityANF 84.2 · LULU 89.1LULU +4.9
Pillars run 0–100. Value is judged against each company's own sector, so a Value score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.
Common questions
Is ANF or LULU the better stock?
ANF scores higher: ANF 73.6, LULU 47.9 out of 100 on the Bull Rankings quality-growth score, which blends business quality, growth and valuation into one number. A higher score means a stronger business at a more reasonable price — it is not a price target or a recommendation.
Where do ANF and LULU differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where ANF leads by 45 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. Neither name sweeps: they trade the lead across the three pillars, so the comparison is a trade-off rather than one being better on every measure.
How are ANF and LULU scored?
Each carries the same 0–100 quality-growth score used everywhere on the site, built from three pillars — quality (profitability and returns on capital), growth (revenue and earnings), and value (what you pay for them) — combined as a geometric mean, so a weak pillar cannot be papered over by a strong one.
How current is this comparison?
The whole universe is re-scored every trading day after the US market close, so the scores and fundamentals here reflect the latest published edition.