Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. RL scored 67.2, ONON scored 75.5 — ONON leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. RL'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.
RL
Ralph Lauren Corporation
Apparel Manufacturing · Quality-Growth
67.2
$371.28 · $22.1B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
8.3
ONON leads
ONON
On Holding AG
Footwear & Accessories · Quality-Growth
75.5
$35.09 · $11.7B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestONON23.4x
Fastest growthONON+30.0%
Strongest balance sheetONON0.29
Highest qualityRL83 / 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)
RL
stronger →← stronger
ONON
83
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
73
83
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
96
44
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
72
ONON is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
RL
ONON
$1.1bC+
FCF
$517mC+
+14.7%B+
Rev
+30.0%A
1.10B
D/E
0.29A-
23.4xC+
P/E
23.4xC+
1.97C+
PEG
0.55A-
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
RL
ONON
42% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
59% above
~18%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~29%/yr
-37%
1-yr DCF upside
-51%
-30%
5-yr DCF upside
-37%
-17%
10-yr DCF upside
-12%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
RL
Why this score
Buying back stock
Raising its dividend
Durable high returns
ONON
Why this score
Durable high returns
Diluting shareholders
Foreign reporter (CHF)
The companies
RLRalph Lauren Corporation
Apparel Manufacturing · $371.28 · beta 1.35
Why now
Apparel Manufacturing · market cap $22.1b. 12% off the 52-week high of $421.60. Revenue growing +15%, comfortably above the S&P median. 17 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $446.71 (implying +20% upside).
Moat
ROE 36% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 112% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Mature compounder — the risk is paying up for quality at a moment when growth is decelerating. Watch for sequential revenue + margin trends; the inflection from "compounder" to "ex-compounder" is hard to spot until the multiple already started compressing.
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.
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 RL and ONON diverge
On the headline score the gap is 8.3 points in favor of ONON. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
ValueRL 44.4 · ONON 71.6ONON +27.2
GrowthRL 82.6 · ONON 95.8ONON +13.2
QualityRL 82.9 · ONON 73.0RL +9.9
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 ONON or RL the better stock?
ONON scores higher: ONON 75.5, RL 67.2 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 RL differ most?
The widest gap is value, where ONON leads by 27 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 ONON and RL 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.