Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. KTB scored 80.0, BIRK scored 68.5 — KTB leads.
Compare another set
KTB
Kontoor Brands, Inc.
Apparel Manufacturing · Quality-Growth
80
$65.62 · $3.6B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
11.5
KTB leads
BIRK
Birkenstock Holding plc
Footwear & Accessories · Quality-Growth
68.5
$33.65 · $5.6B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestBIRK15.5x
Fastest growthKTB+34.3%
Strongest balance sheetBIRK0.69
Highest qualityKTB81 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueKTB-53%
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)
KTB
stronger →← stronger
BIRK
81
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
60
79
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
87
80
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
72
KTB is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
KTB
BIRK
$422mC
FCF
$327mC
+34.3%A
Rev
+16.2%B+
2.06C
D/E
0.69B+
16.0xB+
P/E
15.5xB+
1.89C+
PEG
0.95B+
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
KTB
BIRK
53% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
2% above
~-11%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~13%/yr
+99%
1-yr DCF upside
-19%
+112%
5-yr DCF upside
-2%
+131%
10-yr DCF upside
+27%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
KTB
Why this score
Durable high returns
BIRK
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
Short track record
Foreign reporter (EUR)
The companies
KTBKontoor Brands, Inc.
Apparel Manufacturing · $65.62 · beta 0.90
Why now
Apparel Manufacturing · market cap $3.6b. Down 26% from 52-week high of $88.96 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +34% — in hypergrowth territory. 10 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $97.50 (implying +49% upside).
Moat
ROE 43% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 158% of net income, helped by cash released from working capital ($123m) that doesn't repeat every year.
Risk
D/E 2.06 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer.
BIRKBirkenstock Holding plc
Footwear & Accessories · $33.65 · beta 1.30
Why now
Footwear & Accessories · market cap $5.6b. Down 34% from 52-week high of $50.73 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +16%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.95 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 20 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $50.16 (implying +49% upside).
Moat
Net margin 15% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 12% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere.
Risk
Down 34% 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 KTB and BIRK diverge
On the headline score the gap is 11.5 points in favor of KTB. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
QualityKTB 80.8 · BIRK 59.9KTB +20.9
ValueKTB 80.4 · BIRK 72.3KTB +8.1
GrowthKTB 78.7 · BIRK 86.6BIRK +7.9
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 KTB or BIRK the better stock?
KTB scores higher: KTB 80.0, BIRK 68.5 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 KTB and BIRK differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where KTB leads by 21 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 KTB and BIRK 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.