Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. ONON scored 75.5, BIRK scored 68.5 — ONON leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. BIRK's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but ONON's are as of December 2025 — a 6-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
ONON
On Holding AG
Footwear & Accessories · Quality-Growth
75.5
$35.09 · $11.7B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
7.0
ONON 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 growthONON+30.0%
Strongest balance sheetONON0.29
Highest qualityONON73 / 100
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)
ONON
stronger →← stronger
BIRK
73
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
60
96
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
87
72
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
72
ONON is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
ONON
BIRK
$517mC+
FCF
$327mC
+30.0%A
Rev
+16.2%B+
0.29A-
D/E
0.69B+
23.4xC+
P/E
15.5xB+
0.55A-
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
ONON
BIRK
59% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
2% above
~29%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~13%/yr
-51%
1-yr DCF upside
-19%
-37%
5-yr DCF upside
-2%
-12%
10-yr DCF upside
+27%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
ONON
Why this score
Durable high returns
Diluting shareholders
Foreign reporter (CHF)
BIRK
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
Short track record
Foreign reporter (EUR)
The companies
ONONOn Holding AG
Footwear & Accessories · $35.09 · beta 2.08
Why now
Footwear & Accessories · market cap $11.7b. Down 31% from 52-week high of $51.08 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +30% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.55 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 30 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $43.50 (implying +24% upside).
Moat
ROE 12% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 108% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Down 31% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Beta 2.08 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return.
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 ONON and BIRK diverge
On the headline score the gap is 7.0 points in favor of ONON. The widest single difference is Quality, where ONON leads by 13.1 points.
QualityONON 73.0 · BIRK 59.9ONON +13.1
GrowthONON 95.8 · BIRK 86.6ONON +9.2
ValueONON 71.6 · BIRK 72.3level
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 ONON or BIRK the better stock?
ONON scores higher: ONON 75.5, 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 ONON and BIRK differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where ONON leads by 13 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. ONON also leads growth, while value is effectively level between them.
How are ONON 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.