DICK'S Sporting Goods holds the cleaner structural position, with valuation as the main driver and stability adding further support. Five Below still has the edge on growth, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. In the market, Five Below carries the stronger setup — intact trend against DICK'S Sporting Goods's broken trend. That leaves a split case: the structural lead stays with DICK'S Sporting Goods, but the market is not currently confirming it.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.
The clearest separation starts in valuation, but stability adds another real layer to the result. The overall score gap is 13 points in favour of DICK'S Sporting Goods, Inc..
Both operate in: Specialty Retail
This comparison is based on industry proximity, not on functional trajectory similarity. DKS and FIVE share the same industry classification.
For a similarity-based comparison, see how DICK'S Sporting Goods and Five Below each position within their functional peer groups in AssetNext.
Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.
The largest gaps do not all point in the same direction.
Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.
DICK'S Sporting Goods, Inc. and Five Below, Inc. look relatively close on structure, but the price setup still leans toward DICK'S Sporting Goods, Inc..
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
The multiple-based pricing edge comes from a forward P/E that is 13.7 turns lower.
Earnings growth also leans the other way, which keeps the score lead from reading as a full growth sweep.
Valuation is the clearest driver of the lead, with stability adding further support — though growth still provides a real counterweight.
Break down the DKS vs FIVE comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how DKS and FIVE each compare against other companies in their peer groups.
Rule-based, descriptive analysis only. Derived from peer percentile dimensions. Not investment advice. Peer groups are determined algorithmically based on structural similarity — not by sector classification alone.
AssetNext scores reflect each company's structural position within its functional peer group — not a ranking against all stocks simultaneously. Peers are identified by similarity across eight financial dimensions, including revenue growth trajectory, margin structure, capital intensity, and earnings stability. A score of 75 means the company ranks in the top quartile within its own peer group, not the entire market.
Four dimension scores drive the overall peer score: Growth (revenue trajectory and expansion dynamics), Quality (margin structure and capital efficiency), Valuation (peer-relative pricing on standard multiples), and Stability (earnings consistency and financial predictability). Each dimension is scored 0–100 relative to the peer group, then combined into an overall peer score using equal weighting.
Scores are recalculated periodically as underlying financial data is updated. All analysis is descriptive and rule-based — AssetNext describes structural realities and never issues buy, sell or hold recommendations.