Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. TPR scored 73.9, BOOT scored 77.0 — BOOT leads.
Compare another set
TPR
Tapestry, Inc.
Luxury Goods · Quality-Growth
73.9
$116.24 · $23.1B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
3.1
BOOT leads
BOOT
Boot Barn Holdings, Inc.
Apparel Retail · Quality-Growth
77
$119.96 · $3.6B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestBOOT15.4x
Fastest growthBOOT+17.9%
Strongest balance sheetBOOT0.59
Highest qualityTPR82 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueTPR-3%
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)
TPR
stronger →← stronger
BOOT
82
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
73
76
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
89
64
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
71
BOOT is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
TPR
BOOT
$1.8bC+
FCF
$116mC
+14.2%B+
Rev
+17.9%B+
5.72D
D/E
0.59B+
16.0xB+
P/E
15.4xB+
1.66C+
PEG
1.44B
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
TPR
BOOT
3% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
150% above
~7%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~38%/yr
-6%
1-yr DCF upside
-66%
+3%
5-yr DCF upside
-60%
+18%
10-yr DCF upside
-50%
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
TPR
Why this score
Buying back stock
Raising its dividend
BOOT
Why this score
Durable high returns
The companies
TPRTapestry, Inc.
Luxury Goods · $116.24 · beta 1.43
Why now
Luxury Goods · market cap $23.1b. Down 29% from 52-week high of $164.80 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +14%, comfortably above the S&P median. 20 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $166.50 (implying +43% upside).
Moat
Net margin 19% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. FCF converts 119% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
D/E 5.72 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Beta 1.43 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return.
BOOTBoot Barn Holdings, Inc.
Apparel Retail · $119.96 · beta 1.76
Why now
Apparel Retail · market cap $3.6b. Down 43% from 52-week high of $210.25 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +18%, comfortably above the S&P median. 14 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $217.00 (implying +81% upside).
Moat
ROE 19% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately.
Risk
Down 43% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Beta 1.76 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 TPR and BOOT diverge
On the headline score the gap is 3.1 points in favor of BOOT. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
GrowthTPR 76.0 · BOOT 88.9BOOT +12.9
QualityTPR 82.3 · BOOT 72.7TPR +9.6
ValueTPR 64.5 · BOOT 70.5BOOT +6.0
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 BOOT or TPR the better stock?
BOOT scores higher: BOOT 77.0, TPR 73.9 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 BOOT and TPR differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where BOOT leads by 13 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 BOOT and TPR 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.