DBGI vs GAP

Digital Brands Group, Inc. vs Gap, Inc. (The) — Valuation Comparison 2026

DBGI

Apparel Retail
Digital Brands Group, Inc.
Quality
3.3
out of 10
Value Trap
52
WARN
Price
$0.49
Last close
Models
10/13
Active
VS

GAP

Apparel Retail
Gap, Inc. (The)
Quality
8.4
out of 10
Value Trap
6
SAFE
Price
$25.00
Last close
Models
13/13
Active

Model-by-Model Comparison

ModelType DBGI Fair ValueDBGI Upside GAP Fair ValueGAP Upside
Bayesian DCF Intrinsic $0.06 -88.5% $8.94 -64.2%
Earnings Power Value Intrinsic $0.54 -59.6% $13.74 -45.0%
EROIC Spread Intrinsic $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
First Chicago Scenario $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
Markov DDM Intrinsic $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
ML-RIV Intrinsic $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
Dynamic NAV Asset-Based $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
PWERM Option-Based $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
Regime Cross-Sectional Relative $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
Sentiment SOTP Hybrid $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
CUCE Ensemble Ensemble $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
FTNN Topology Relative $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
RCMH-DCF Intrinsic $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
🔒

Unlock Full 13-Model Comparison

Access all valuation models for DBGI vs GAP — including EROIC Spread, First Chicago, Markov DDM, PWERM, and 7 more.

Access Full Analysis — From $27/mo →

DBGI vs GAP — Which Stock Is More Undervalued?

GAP scores higher with a 8.4/10 quality rating vs DBGI's 3.3/10. Both stocks are analyzed daily using SEC EDGAR filings across 13 independent models.

Comparing Digital Brands Group, Inc. (DBGI) and Gap, Inc. (The) (GAP) across 13 institutional-grade valuation models reveals how each company's intrinsic value stacks up against its market price. CirclFi's engine processes SEC EDGAR 10-K and 10-Q filings, FRED macroeconomic data, and GDELT news sentiment to generate independent fair value estimates daily.

DBGI currently trades at $0.49 with a QOC of 3.3/10, while GAP trades at $25.00 with a QOC of 8.4/10.

Both companies are analyzed with models spanning intrinsic (Bayesian DCF, EPV), scenario-based (First Chicago), regime-switching (Markov DDM, RCMH-DCF), machine learning (ML-RIV, FTNN Topology), and ensemble methods (CUCE).