Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Gildan Activewear Inc.
How Gildan Activewear Inc. stacks up
GIL · against 355 other Consumer Cyclical companies listed in US-listed
Valuation
43/ 100
Below the middle of the pack.
Ranked #193 of 356 · scores higher than 44% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score52 peers with a valuation score of 40–49, including GIL · Click a bar to see the companies
Why valuation scores 43?
Weighted metrics compared with all Consumer Cyclical companies.Its metrics sit close to the Consumer Cyclical norm.
- Earnings yield is close to the peer norm. Earnings yield: 5.3% vs peer median 4.4%
- EBITDA yield is close to the peer norm. EBITDA yield: 6.6% vs peer median 8.8%
- Free cash flow yield is close to the peer norm. Free cash flow yield: 6.6% vs peer median 6.1%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = GIL, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | GIL | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 352 reported | 3.2% | 4.3% | 39% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 359 reported | 9.2% | 8.4% | 59% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 325 reported | 6.9% | 5.3% | 62% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 352 reported | 44.4% | 35.8% | 54% | Context only |
Ranking by valuation score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around GIL| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 6.2B USD | 99 | 69 | |
| 2 | 7.7B USD | 97 | 68 | |
| 2 | 6.2B USD | 97 | 60 | |
| 4 | 395M USD | 96 | 59 | |
| 4 | 114.1B USD | 96 | 91 | |
| 193 | 1.3B USD | 43 | 44 | |
| 193 | 15.1B USD | 43 | 54 | |
| 193 | 1.1B USD | 43 | 35 | |
| 193 | 24.8B USD | 43 | 54 | |
| 193 | 7.5B USD | 43 | 48 | |
| 193 | 16.6B USD | 43 | 58 | |
| 193 | 1.0B USD | 43 | 37 | |
| 200 | 4.7B USD | 42 | 52 | |
| 200 | 7.9B USD | 42 | 26 |
Scores are sector-relative percentiles from the latest snapshot, always calculated against the whole sector: narrowing the comparison group changes who you compare with, not the scores. Missing metrics are left out and the remaining weights rescaled. How we score