Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Lands' End, Inc.
How Lands' End, Inc. stacks up
LE · against 355 other Consumer Cyclical companies listed in US-listed
Growth
84/ 100
Near the top of its peers.
Ranked #66 of 356 · scores higher than 80% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the growth score35 peers with a growth score of 80–89, including LE · Click a bar to see the companies
Why growth scores 84?
Weighted metrics compared with all Consumer Cyclical companies.Mainly thanks to its earnings per share growth, which is stronger than most Consumer Cyclical peers.
- slower revenue growth over three years: weaker than 84% of peers. 3-year revenue growth: -4.9% vs peer median 4.3%
- slower revenue growth over the last year: weaker than 64% of peers. Revenue growth: 0.4% vs peer median 3.7%
- faster growth in earnings per share: stronger than 100% of peers. Earnings per share growth: 5955.6% vs peer median 4.2%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = LE, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | LE | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue growthHigher is better · 358 reported | 0.4% | 5.9% | 25% | 33% | |
| Earnings per share growthHigher is better · 249 reported | 5955.6% | 6.2% | 100% | 33% | |
| 3-year revenue growthHigher is better · 353 reported | -4.9% | 4.1% | 12% | 33% |
Ranking by growth score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around LE| Rank | Company | Market cap | Growth | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 79.0B USD | 100 | 61 | |
| 1 | 3.1B USD | 100 | 59 | |
| 1 | 47.0B USD | 100 | 61 | |
| 4 | 17.7B USD | 99 | 54 | |
| 4 | 293M USD | 99 | 89 | |
| 66 | 16.7B USD | 84 | 54 | |
| 66 | 7.0B USD | 84 | 46 | |
| 66 | 1.3B USD | 84 | 51 | |
| 66 | 3.5B USD | 84 | 41 | |
| 66 | 282M USD | 84 | 63 | |
| 72 | 9.8B USD | 83 | 57 | |
| 72 | 414M USD | 83 | 36 | |
| 72 | 350M USD | 83 | 26 | |
| 75 | 1.8B USD | 82 | 29 |
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