COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
KTB vs UAA
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. KTB scored 78.1, UAA scored 23.6 — KTB leads.
Compare another set
KTB
Kontoor Brands, Inc.
78.1
$82.01 · $4.5B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
54.5
KTB leads
UAA
Under Armour, Inc.
23.6
$5.39 · $2.3B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- Fastest growthKTB+34.3%
- Strongest balance sheetUAA0.96
- Highest qualityKTB80 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueKTB-58%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
KTB
stronger →← stronger
UAA
80
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
24
89
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
14
67
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
38
KTB is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
KTB
UAA
$422mC
FCF
-$81mF
+34.3%A
Rev
-3.6%D+
2.06C
D/E
0.96B
16.6xB+
P/E
—
0.65A-
PEG
1.21B
—
P/S
0.5xA-
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
UAA
58% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
—
~-6%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
—
+81%
1-yr DCF upside
—
+137%
5-yr DCF upside
—
+252%
10-yr DCF upside
—
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
UAA
No notable signals flagged.
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.
UAAUnder Armour, Inc.
Why now
Apparel Manufacturing · market cap $2.3b. Down 34% from 52-week high of $8.15 — deep drawdown territory. 18 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $6.40 (implying +19% upside).
Moat
Turnaround / out-of-favor name — GAAP-unprofitable for now, so the durability case is forward-looking: it rests on a recovery (margin normalization, a cyclical upturn or restructuring) or an un-monetized asset (IP / network effects / first-mover position) rather than on current reported results.
Risk
Free cash flow is negative (-$81m) — capital raises or debt issuance likely required; dilution / leverage risk. Currently unprofitable (margin -10.0%) — path to GAAP profitability is the core thesis 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 UAA diverge
On the headline score the gap is 54.5 points in favor of KTB. The widest single difference is Growth, where KTB leads by 74.7 points.
- GrowthKTB 88.8 · UAA 14.1KTB +74.7
- QualityKTB 79.6 · UAA 24.2KTB +55.4
- ValueKTB 67.3 · UAA 38.5KTB +28.8
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.