Crocs Inc's Competitiveness
A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of Crocs Inc (CROX) against its publicly traded competitors: sales growth, net income, profitability, valuation and market share, plus each peer's market capitalization, revenue, income and employees. Free below: the top 5 peers. Subscriber access adds the full competitor list and CSV downloads.
Key Findings: Crocs Inc vs Its Competitors
- TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 4,055M vs 79,815M combined for tracked competitors (4.8% combined share).
- Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+16.3% annualized vs trailing 12 months), vs decelerating (-9.6%) for its tracked peer group.
- Growth: Crocs Inc generated 2.7% revenue growth year over year in Q2 2026, vs -0.8% for its tracked competitors combined.
- Profitability: Its 17.4% net margin compares with 9.9% for the peer group.
- Scale: Crocs Inc ranks #11 of 49 companies by market capitalization in the Apparel, Footwear & Accessories industry, holding 2.1% of industry market cap.
- Peer revenue share: Crocs Inc accounted for 6.1% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group, up from 6.0% a year earlier.
- Peer differentiation: Revenue per employee of $0.51M compares with $0.52M for the peer group (1.0x).
Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).
CROX Sales vs. its Competitors, Q2 2026
Crocs Inc reported revenue growth of 2.67 % year on year in Q2 2026, above its competitors' combined revenue change of -0.77 %.
With a net margin of 17.37 %, Crocs Inc achieved higher profitability than its competitors (9.93 %).
Crocs Inc generated 6.14 % of the combined sales of its peer group, up from 5.95 % a year earlier.
Crocs Inc vs. its Competitors, Q2 2026
Revenue growth, year on year
Net margin
Revenue run-rate vs trailing 12 months
TTM net margin
TTM = trailing twelve months. Run-rate annualizes the latest quarter (×4) and compares it to TTM. In millions of $. High-Confidence Competitors are named as a competitor directly in an SEC filing; Similar-Size Competitors are the closest peers by market-cap rank within the same industry; Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors are the closest peers by combined revenue growth, operating margin and ROIC, all independent of the competitor list.
TTM revenue, latest-quarter run-rate and net income/margin benchmarked across Crocs Inc and its 4 competitor groupings. Available under Commercial License.
| Entity | TTM Revenue | Rev Run-rate vs TTM |
|---|---|---|
| Crocs inc | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Competitors combined | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| High-Confidence Competitors (1) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar-Size Competitors (6) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar Growth & Profitability (7) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
TTM revenue, run-rate and net margin benchmarking across Crocs Inc's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.
For context: the Apparel, Footwear & Accessories industry grew revenue 8.8% year over year, combined, vs 2.7% for Crocs Inc. Crocs Inc's share of combined industry revenue moved from 1.70% to 1.60%, a loss of 0.10 percentage points.
Crocs Inc's Competitor Quality Breadth
Share of each group, trailing 12 months: profitable (net margin > 0), expanding (revenue growth > 0), growing faster than the industry's own median, and financially distressed (Piotroski F-Score of 2 or below).
| Entity | Profitable | Expanding | Above Industry Growth | Distressed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Crocs inc | Yes | No | No | No |
| Competitors combined (19) | ||||
| High-Confidence Competitors (2) | ||||
| Similar-Size Competitors (10) | ||||
| Similar Growth & Profitability (8) | 87.50 % (7 of 8) | 75.00 % (6 of 8) | 50.00 % (4 of 8) | 0.00 % (0 of 8) |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Altman Z-Score is not shown here: it is not populated in the underlying data for any company. Percentages are of companies in each group that report the relevant metric, not of the full group size.
CROX Stock Performance relative to its Competitors
CROX Stock Performance relative to High-Confidence Competitors
CROX Stock Performance relative to Similar-Size Competitors
CROX Stock Performance relative to Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors
5 Best-Performing Tracked Competitors, Trailing 12 Months
| # | Competitor | TTM Share Price Return | vs U.S.A. 500 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Vera Bradley Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 2 | Designer Brands Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 3 | Weyco Group inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 4 | Rocky Brands Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 5 | Steven Madden Ltd | 282.9% | Outperformed |
TTM share price return and U.S.A. 500 outperformance for Crocs Inc's best-performing tracked competitors requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months.
Crocs Inc's Comment on Competition and Industry Peers
The principal elements of competition in these markets include brand awareness, product functionality, design, quality, pricing, customer service, and marketing and distribution. We believe that our unique footwear designs, the Croslite material, our prices, our expanded product line, and our distribution network continue to position us well in the marketplace. However, a number of companies in the casual footwear industry have greater financial resources, more comprehensive product lines, broader market presence, longer standing relationships with wholesalers, longer operating histories, greater distribution capabilities, stronger brand recognition and greater marketing resources than we have. Furthermore, we face competition from new players who have been attracted to the market with products similar to ours as the result of the unique design and success of our footwear products.
The global casual, athletic and fashion footwear markets are highly competitive. Although we believe that we do not compete directly with any single company with respect to the entire spectrum of our products, we believe portions of our wholesale, retail, and ecommerce businesses compete with companies including, but not limited to, Deckers Outdoor Corp., Skechers USA Inc., Steve Madden, Ltd., Wolverine World Wide, Inc. and VF Corporation. Our company-operated retail locations also compete with footwear retailers such as Genesco, Inc., Macys, Dillards, Dicks Sporting Goods Inc., The Finish Line Inc., and Footlocker, Inc.The principal elements of competition in these markets include brand awareness, product functionality, design, quality, pricing, customer service, and marketing and distribution. We believe that our unique footwear designs, the Croslite material, our prices, our expanded product line, and our distribution network continue to position us well in the marketplace. However, a number of companies in the casual footwear industry have greater financial resources, more comprehensive product lines, broader market presence, longer standing relationships with wholesalers, longer operating histories, greater distribution capabilities, stronger brand recognition and greater marketing resources than we have. Furthermore, we face competition from new players who have been attracted to the market with products similar to ours as the result of the unique design and success of our footwear products.
The global casual, athletic and fashion footwear markets are highly competitive. Although we believe that we do not compete directly with any single company with respect to the entire spectrum of our products, we believe portions of our wholesale, retail, and ecommerce businesses compete with companies including, but not limited to, Deckers Outdoor Corp., Skechers USA Inc., Steve Madden, Ltd., Wolverine World Wide, Inc. and VF Corporation. Our company-operated retail locations also compete with footwear retailers such as Genesco, Inc., Macys, Dillards, Dicks Sporting Goods Inc., The Finish Line Inc., and Footlocker, Inc.The principal elements of competition in these markets include brand awareness, product functionality, design, quality, pricing, customer service, and marketing and distribution. We believe that our unique footwear designs, the Croslite material, our prices, our expanded product line, and our distribution network continue to position us well in the marketplace. However, a number of companies in the casual footwear industry have greater financial resources, more comprehensive product lines, broader market presence, longer standing relationships with wholesalers, longer operating histories, greater distribution capabilities, stronger brand recognition and greater marketing resources than we have. Furthermore, we face competition from new players who have been attracted to the market with products similar to ours as the result of the unique design and success of our footwear products.
The global casual, athletic and fashion footwear markets are highly competitive. Although we believe that we do not compete directly with any single company with respect to the entire spectrum of our products, we believe portions of our wholesale, retail, and ecommerce businesses compete with companies including, but not limited to, Deckers Outdoor Corp., Skechers USA Inc., Steve Madden, Ltd., Wolverine World Wide, Inc. and VF Corporation. Our company-operated retail locations also compete with footwear retailers such as Genesco, Inc., Macys, Dillards, Dicks Sporting Goods Inc., The Finish Line Inc., and Footlocker, Inc.The principal elements of competition in these markets include brand awareness, product functionality, design, quality, pricing, customer service, and marketing and distribution. We believe that our unique footwear designs, the Croslite material, our prices, our expanded product line, and our distribution network continue to position us well in the marketplace. However, a number of companies in the casual footwear industry have greater financial resources, more comprehensive product lines, broader market presence, longer standing relationships with wholesalers, longer operating histories, greater distribution capabilities, stronger brand recognition and greater marketing resources than we have. Furthermore, we face competition from new players who have been attracted to the market with products similar to ours as the result of the unique design and success of our footwear products.
Publicly Traded Peers of Crocs inc
Revenue and income for trailing 12 months, in millions of $, except employees| Company | Market Cap | Revenues |
|---|---|---|
| Crocs inc | 6,072.48 | 4,055.08 |
| Nike Inc | 53,863.97 | 46,398.00 |
| Amer Sports Inc | 15,552.15 | 6,565.30 |
| Lululemon Athletica Inc | 11,357.39 | 11,093.25 |
| Deckers Outdoor Corp | 10,857.48 | 5,527.35 |
| Skechers Usa Inc | 9,551.88 | 9,411.05 |
| SUBTOTAL | 126,337.06 | 112,464.30 |
Sign in to see all competitors of Crocs inc .
Sources: Crocs inc's official press releases and regulatory filings; CSIMarket.com's market research; and the financial filings and press releases of the other companies cited.
Updated on:
Focus of this report: publicly traded companies. Ten additional tables on Crocs inc versus competitors, including market share analysis, are in the navigation menu under Competition. To download the tables, please subscribe.
Crocs Inc's Competitors Named by the Company
Competitive relationships identified from SEC filings and corroborating sources, each with a basis and confidence.| Competitor | Basis | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| Shoe Carnival Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Deckers Outdoor Corporation | Named by the company | 85% |
| Steven Madden Ltd | Named by the company | 85% |
| Nike Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Skechers Usa Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Wolverine World Wide Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
Filing basis, confidence, active dates and source counts for Crocs Inc's named competitors require a Commercial License.
Methodology: relationships are extracted from SEC filings (named-competitor disclosures) and corroborating sources. Named by the company = explicitly disclosed as a competitor; Inferred = derived from corroborating signals. Confidence reflects evidence strength.
Crocs Inc's Business Segment Mix vs Peers
Revenue by operating segment or division, as named and reported by each company. Segment names are the filer's own and are not standardized across companies. Do not assume a same-named or similarly-named segment is defined identically between two companies. Shares are of each company's own total revenue and are not required to sum to 100% (intersegment revenue, unallocated items).| Company | Largest Segment |
|---|---|
| Crocs inc | Crocs Brand 83.33 % |
| Nike Inc | North America 44.56 % |
| Lululemon Athletica Inc | Americas 71.41 % |
| Deckers Outdoor Corp | UGG Brand 50.05 % |
| Skechers Usa Inc | Wholesale 53.35 % |
| Steven Madden Ltd | Direct-to-Consumer 38.36 % |
Source: operating segment revenue as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API, leaf-level reportable segments only (parent roll-up segments are excluded where sub-segments are separately disclosed).
Crocs Inc's Productivity vs Peers Comparison
Revenue and income per employee, trailing 12 months, in $; market cap in millions of $| Company | Market Cap | Revenue / Employee | Income / Employee |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crocs inc | 6,072 | 506,253 | 74,085 |
| Nike Inc | 53,864 | 635,589 | 42,575 |
| Amer Sports Inc | 15,552 | 426,318 | 28,597 |
| Lululemon Athletica Inc | 11,357 | 284,442 | 36,358 |
| Deckers Outdoor Corp | 10,857 | 1,151,531 | 484,829 |
| Skechers Usa Inc | 9,552 | 1,022,940 | 79,618 |
| PEERS TOTAL | 120,265 | 522,094 | 41,850 |
Crocs Inc's Geographic Revenue Exposure vs Peers
Revenue by country/region as reported in each company's most recent filing. Disclosure granularity varies by filer (some report by country, others by broad region) and is shown as disclosed.| Company | Largest Market |
|---|---|
| Lululemon Athletica Inc | Americas 71.41 % |
| Deckers Outdoor Corp | United States 58.33 % |
| Skechers Usa Inc | Americas 45.63 % |
| Steven Madden Ltd | Domestic Destination 63.22 % |
| Columbia Sportswear Company | United States 54.23 % |
Source: revenue geography as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API. Percentages are of that company's own total consolidated revenue for its most recent reported period.
Crocs Inc's Position in Industry Market Structure
Market-capitalization share and concentration across all 45 companies in Crocs Inc's industry classification, broader than the peer set above. Market cap in millions of $.Crocs Inc ranks #11 of 45 companies by market capitalization in its industry, holding 2.10 % of total industry market cap. The industry's Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) is 1,369, indicating a unconcentrated market structure (U.S. antitrust guidance: below 1,500 unconcentrated, 1,500 to 2,500 moderately concentrated, above 2,500 highly concentrated).
| Rank | Company | Market Cap | Industry Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Cintas Corporation | 81,475 | 28.18 % |
| 2 | Nike Inc | 53,864 | 18.63 % |
| 3 | Tapestry Inc | 23,847 | 8.25 % |
| 4 | Ralph Lauren Corporation | 21,894 | 7.57 % |
| 5 | Amer Sports Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 6 | Lululemon Athletica Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 7 | Deckers Outdoor Corp | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 8 | On Holding Ag | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 9 | Levi Strauss and Co | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 10 | Gildan Activewear Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 11 | Crocs inc | 6,072 | 2.10 % |
Market cap and industry share for the rest of Crocs Inc's industry peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation) across CSIMarket's industry classification, market capitalization as of 2026-09-28.
Crocs Inc's Same-Size Peers & Stock Performance
Peers chosen by closeness in market-cap rank within the same industry classification (not the named-competitor list above). Trailing 12-month total return, 3-month price momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio vs the broad U.S. market.| Rank | Company | Market Cap | TTM Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6 | Lululemon Athletica Inc | 11,357 | -41.83 % |
| 7 | Deckers Outdoor Corp | 10,857 | -26.44 % |
| 8 | On Holding Ag | 9,552 | -33.17 % |
| 9 | Levi Strauss and Co | 7,719 | -13.72 % |
| 10 | Gildan Activewear Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 11 | Crocs inc | 6,072 | 61.68 % |
| 12 | Birkenstock Holding Plc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 13 | V F Corporation | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 14 | Kontoor Brands Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 15 | Pvh Corp | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 16 | Steven Madden Ltd | 1,234 | 12.3% |
Market cap, return, momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio for the rest of Crocs Inc's same-size peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation); returns and risk metrics as of 2026-09-28. Beta and Sharpe ratio are versus the broad U.S. equity market, not this industry.
Crocs Inc's Profitability & Cost Structure
Trailing 12-month margins from SEC-filed financials. Operating margin is compared to the Apparel, Footwear & Accessories industry median; gross margin, EBITDA margin and capital intensity are compared to the live industry average (58 companies). See the full Apparel, Footwear & Accessories industry profitability benchmarks.| Metric | Company | Industry | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 57.47 % | 47.01 % (avg) | +10.5 pp |
| Operating Margin | 20.73 % | industry median | +14.5 pp |
| EBITDA Margin | 20.25 % | 3.73 % (avg) | +16.5 pp |
| Capital Intensity (Capex / Revenue) | 1.43 % | 3.06 % (avg) | -1.6 pp |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. SG&A and R&D as a share of revenue have limited coverage as this data is backfilled and appear only where reported. Higher capital intensity is not inherently negative; it reflects the industry's asset requirements.
Crocs Inc's Valuation vs Competitive Position
Valuation multiples vs the Apparel, Footwear & Accessories industry average (58 companies, excluding loss-making/negative-equity outliers), alongside returns on capital for context on whether a premium or discount lines up with measurably stronger or weaker returns. See the full Apparel, Footwear & Accessories industry valuation benchmarks.| Metric | Company | Industry Average | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| P/E | 10.5x | 19.0x | -8.5x |
| EV / EBITDA | 8.7x | 12.9x | -4.2x |
| P/B | 4.4x | 2.7x | +1.6x |
| Return on Equity | 43.41 % | industry aggregate | 16.59 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | 15.94 % | 2.80 % (avg) | 13.14 % |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. A valuation premium or discount is not, by itself, a judgment of over- or under-valuation. Compare it against the return and growth context shown elsewhere on this page.
Crocs Inc's Multi-Year Financial Trajectory
Fiscal-year revenue growth, operating margin, return on invested capital and P/E, as reported in SEC filings.| Metric | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | 6.32 % | 13.08 % | 12.62 % | 66.92 % | 53.67 % | 11.45 % | 3.51 % | -1.49 % |
| Operating Margin | 5.78 % | 10.45 % | 15.45 % | 29.53 % | 23.93 % | 26.17 % | 24.92 % | 3.70 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | 11.49 % | 21.98 % | 25.97 % | 47.49 % | 18.02 % | 19.23 % | 16.88 % | 2.66 % |
| P/E | - | 22.9x | 14.0x | 12.8x | 11.8x | 7.6x | 6.7x | - |
Source: CSIMarket API, fiscal-year figures. P/E is this company's own historical ratio at each fiscal year end and can swing sharply around an earnings trough: that is real, not a data error.
Crocs Inc's Strategic Group Map
Every company in Crocs Inc's industry and named-competitor list, plotted by trailing 12-month revenue growth and operating margin. Crocs Inc is shown in red; its closest peers by combined growth, margin and ROIC (the Similar Growth & Profitability group above) are labeled.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Extreme outlier values (from near-zero-revenue companies) are excluded from the plotted cloud but never from the highlighted company or its labeled peers.
Crocs Inc's BCG Growth-Share Matrix
Relative market share (vs Crocs Inc's largest competitor by market cap) against industry revenue growth, using the standard textbook thresholds (1.0x share, 10% growth) a common framework, not a precision instrument.
Crocs Inc falls in the Dog quadrant: relative market share of 0.07x vs its largest competitor, in an industry growing revenue 5.8% (median, trailing 12 months).
Source: CSIMarket API (market-cap share and industry revenue growth). The 10% growth and 1.0x share lines are standard textbook thresholds, not derived from this industry's own distribution.
Crocs Inc's Competitive Forces (Porter's Five Forces)
Only the forces this data can support honestly are shown; the other three are marked as such rather than guessed.| Force | Assessment | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Competitive Rivalry | High | Industry HHI of 1,369 (see Industry Market Structure & Concentration above) |
| Barriers to Entry | Lower than typical for the industry | Capital intensity (capex / revenue) of 1.43 % vs industry average 3.06 % (see Profitability & Cost Structure above) |
| Supplier Power | Not covered on this page | See Crocs Inc's dedicated suppliers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Buyer Power | Not covered on this page | See Crocs Inc's dedicated customers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Threat of Substitutes | - | No systematic data source for cross-product substitution exists in this system; not estimated |
Note: this is a partial, data-grounded application of the framework, not a complete strategic assessment. Rivalry and barriers-to-entry readings are mechanical translations of the HHI and capital-intensity figures shown elsewhere on this page, not independent judgments.
Crocs Inc's Industry Attractiveness & Competitive Strength
A CSIMarket composite, not a standard field: each axis is an equal-weighted average of three factors already shown elsewhere on this page (industry growth, industry profitability and rivalry for attractiveness; relative market share, profitability and growth vs industry for strength). Disclosed as a designed methodology, not a precision measurement.
Crocs Inc falls in the Low attractiveness / Medium strength cell: Harvest.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Each axis score is a simple 1(low)/2(medium)/3(high) average across its three inputs -- a transparent, disclosed simplification, not a validated academic scoring model.
Crocs Inc's SWOT
Every point below is a fixed rule applied to a metric already shown elsewhere on this page (Market Structure, Profitability, Valuation, Run-Rate, Stock Performance, Quality Breadth) not an independent strategic assessment. A blank quadrant means no rule was met, not that none apply.Strengths
- Operating margin 14.5 points above the industry median.
- Return on equity 16.6 points above the industry aggregate.
- Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+16.3% annualized vs trailing 12 months).
- Outperforming the U.S.A. 500 over the trailing 12 months.
Weaknesses
- Low relative market share vs the industry leader (0.07x).
Opportunities
- Trades at a lower P/E than the industry average (10.5x vs 19.0x) despite a higher return on invested capital -- a possible re-rating opportunity.
Threats
- Tracked peer group's revenue run-rate is broadly decelerating (-9.6% annualized).
Methodology: mechanical, rule-based SWOT. Each bullet reuses a figure already sourced and cited elsewhere on this page; nothing here is generated narrative or independent analyst judgment.
Crocs Inc's Financial Strength vs Peers Comparison
Quick ratio, working capital, debt to equity and asset turnover, trailing 12 months| Company | Quick Ratio | Working Capital | Debt / Equity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crocs inc | 0.21 | 1.45 | 0.95 |
| Nike Inc | 0.64 | 2.12 | 0.61 |
| Amer Sports Inc | 0.30 | 1.50 | 0.05 |
| Lululemon Athletica Inc | 0.01 | 2.20 | - |
| Deckers Outdoor Corp | 1.89 | 3.22 | - |
| Skechers Usa Inc | 0.53 | 2.04 | 0.11 |
Quick ratio = cash / current liabilities; working capital ratio = current assets / current liabilities; asset turnover = revenue / total assets. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Crocs Inc's Revenue and Income Growth vs Peers
Quarterly revenue and net income growth, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Revenue Y/Y | Income Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crocs inc | Q2 2026 | +2.7 % | - |
| Nike Inc | Q2 2026 | -1.1 % | +406.6 % |
| Amer Sports Inc | Q4 2025 | +26.7 % | +461.7 % |
| Lululemon Athletica Inc | Q2 2026 | -4.3 % | -11.2 % |
| Deckers Outdoor Corp | Q2 2026 | +5.8 % | -7.2 % |
| Skechers Usa Inc | Q2 2025 | +13.1 % | +11.1 % |
| PEERS TOTAL | +7.9 % | +160.4 % |
Growth is shown only where both periods are positive. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Crocs Inc's Peers' Costs of Sales and Capital Expenditures
Context for revenue growth: peer costs and capex, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Costs Y/Y | Capex Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crocs inc | Q2 2026 | +8.8 % | +25.1 % |
| Nike Inc | Q2 2026 | -15.8 % | +38.0 % |
| Amer Sports Inc | Q4 2025 | +19.6 % | -5.5 % |
| Lululemon Athletica Inc | Q2 2026 | -9.0 % | -15.9 % |
| Deckers Outdoor Corp | Q2 2026 | +4.3 % | -36.4 % |
| Skechers Usa Inc | Q2 2025 | +17.0 % | +63.3 % |
Crocs Inc's Returns and Turnover vs Peers
ROA, ROI and ROE (trailing 12 months), receivables and inventory turnover| Company | ROA | ROI | ROE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crocs inc | 13.82% | 15.19% | 43.41% |
| Nike Inc | 8.32% | 13.87% | 22.35% |
| Amer Sports Inc | 4.38% | 3.89% | 7.57% |
| Lululemon Athletica Inc | 16.97% | 21.73% | 29.73% |
| Deckers Outdoor Corp | 62.43% | 81.53% | 95.18% |
| Skechers Usa Inc | 8.36% | 9.29% | 14.79% |
ROA = net income / total assets; ROI = net income / investments; ROE = net income / equity; turnover ratios use trailing 12 month revenue (receivables) and cost of sales (inventory).
Crocs Inc's Valuation vs Peers
P/E, price to sales, PEG, price to cash flow and price to book| Company | P/E | Price / Sales |
|---|---|---|
| Crocs inc | 10.66 | 1.50 |
| Nike Inc | 17.40 | 1.16 |
| Amer Sports Inc | 36.34 | 2.37 |
| Lululemon Athletica Inc | 8.29 | 1.02 |
| Deckers Outdoor Corp | 11.16 | 1.96 |
| Skechers Usa Inc | 14.41 | 1.01 |
| PEERS AVERAGE | 13.61 | 1.12 |
P/E = price / diluted EPS (trailing 12 months); PEG = P/E divided by EPS growth; the average row divides the peers' combined market cap by their combined income, sales, cash flow and equity.