COMPARE · Data as of August 24, 2026
KTB vs PVH
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. KTB scored 78.1, PVH scored 54.2 — KTB leads.
Compare another set
KTB
Kontoor Brands, Inc.
78.1
$82.09 · $4.5B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
23.9
KTB leads
PVH
PVH Corp.
54.2
$77.03 · $3.6B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestKTB16.6x
- Fastest growthKTB+34.3%
- Strongest balance sheetPVH0.86
- Highest qualityKTB80 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueKTB-58%
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
PVH
80
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
52
89
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
41
67
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
75
KTB is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
KTB
PVH
$422mC
FCF
$551mC+
+34.3%A
Rev
+3.5%C+
2.06C
D/E
0.86B
16.6xB+
P/E
23.8xC+
0.65A-
PEG
0.06A
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
PVH
58% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
33% below
~-6%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~-6%/yr
+80%
1-yr DCF upside
+46%
+136%
5-yr DCF upside
+48%
+252%
10-yr DCF upside
+52%
These two disagree on this pair: the Value pillar ranks cheapness against sector peers, while price-vs-fair-value is an absolute read. A name can be the better value in its sector and still the dearer one on cash flows.
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
PVH
Why this score
- Buying back stock
The companies
KTBKontoor Brands, Inc.
Why now
Apparel Manufacturing · market cap $4.5b. 8% off the 52-week high of $88.96. Revenue growing +34% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.65 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 10 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $97.70 (implying +19% 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 — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
D/E 2.06 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer.
PVHPVH Corp.
Why now
Apparel Manufacturing · market cap $3.6b. Down 24% from 52-week high of $100.75 — deep drawdown territory. PEG 0.06 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 12 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $91.83 (implying +19% upside).
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income — non-cash charges (depreciation, intangible amortization) are holding down GAAP earnings while cash generation stays strong.
Risk
Beta 1.75 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return. Net margin 1.8% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first. ROE 3% is below the long-run sustainable threshold of ~10% — capital efficiency would need to improve for the equity base to compound at the market rate.
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 PVH diverge
On the headline score the gap is 23.9 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.
- GrowthKTB 88.8 · PVH 41.0KTB +47.8
- QualityKTB 79.6 · PVH 52.1KTB +27.5
- ValueKTB 67.3 · PVH 74.8PVH +7.5
Pillars run 0–100 against sector peers, so a 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.