GIL vs LANV

Gildan Activewear, Inc. vs Lanvin Group Holdings Limited — Valuation Comparison 2026

GIL

Apparel & Other Finishd Prods of Fabrics & Similar Matl
Gildan Activewear, Inc.
Quality
2.5
out of 10
Value Trap
Price
$60.98
Last close
Models
13/13
Active
VS

LANV

Apparel & Other Finishd Prods of Fabrics & Similar Matl
Lanvin Group Holdings Limited
Quality
4.7
out of 10
Value Trap
18
SAFE
Price
$1.50
Last close
Models
9/13
Active

Model-by-Model Comparison

ModelType GIL Fair ValueGIL Upside LANV Fair ValueLANV Upside
Bayesian DCF Intrinsic $16.94 -72.2% $0.60 -61.7%
Earnings Power Value Intrinsic $43.77 -28.8% $5.63 +254.0%
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 GIL vs LANV — including EROIC Spread, First Chicago, Markov DDM, PWERM, and 7 more.

Access Full Analysis — From $27/mo →

GIL vs LANV — Which Stock Is More Undervalued?

LANV scores higher with a 4.7/10 quality rating vs GIL's 2.5/10. Both stocks are analyzed daily using SEC EDGAR filings across 13 independent models.

Comparing Gildan Activewear, Inc. (GIL) and Lanvin Group Holdings Limited (LANV) 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.

GIL currently trades at $60.98 with a QOC of 2.5/10, while LANV trades at $1.50 with a QOC of 4.7/10.

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).