Compare · LEVI vs PASW
LEVI vs PASW
Side-by-side comparison of Levi Strauss & Co (LEVI) and Ping An Biomedical Co. Ltd. (PASW): market cap, price performance, sector, and recent activity on the wire.
Summary
- Both LEVI and PASW operate in Apparel (Consumer Discretionary), so they compete in similar markets.
- LEVI carries a market cap of $8.83B.
- Over the past year, LEVI is up 40.7% and PASW is down 95.1% - LEVI leads by 135.8 points.
- LEVI has been more active in the news (17 items in the past 4 weeks vs 1 for PASW).
- LEVI has more recent analyst coverage (25 ratings vs 0 for PASW).
- Company
- Levi Strauss & Co
- Ping An Biomedical Co. Ltd.
- Price
- $22.32-0.78%
- $0.16-3.08%
- Market cap
- $8.83B
- -
- 1M return
- +20.75%
- +9.86%
- 1Y return
- +40.70%
- -95.10%
- Industry
- Apparel
- Apparel
- Exchange
- NYSE
- NASDAQ
- IPO
- 2019
- 1999
- News (4w)
- 17
- 1
- Recent ratings
- 25
- 0
Levi Strauss & Co
Levi Strauss & Co. operates as an apparel company. It designs, markets, and sells jeans, casual and dress pants, tops, shorts, skirts, jackets, footwear, and related accessories for men, women, and children in the Americas, Europe, and Asia. The company sells its products under the Levi's, Dockers, Signature by Levi Strauss & Co., and Denizen brands; and also licenses its Levi's and Dockers trademarks for various product categories, including footwear, belts, wallets and bags, outerwear, sweaters, dress shirts, kids wear, sleepwear, and hosiery. The company sells its products through third-party retailers, such as department stores, specialty retailers, third-party e-commerce sites, and franchisees who operate brand-dedicated stores; and directly to consumers through various formats, including company-operated mainline and outlet stores, company-operated e-commerce sites, and select shop-in-shops located in department stores and other third-party retail locations. It operates approximately 3,100 brand-dedicated stores and shop-in-shops. The company was founded in 1853 and is headquartered in San Francisco, California.
Latest LEVI
- Director Rodgers Elliott was granted 8,381 shares, increasing direct ownership by 16% to 59,619 units (SEC Form 4)
- Director Prime Joshua E was granted 8,381 shares, increasing direct ownership by 13% to 73,218 units (SEC Form 4)
- Director Patrick Artemis was granted 8,381 shares, increasing direct ownership by 59% to 22,646 units (SEC Form 4)
- Director Ming Jenny J was granted 8,381 shares, increasing direct ownership by 13% to 72,983 units (SEC Form 4)
- Director Marberger David S was granted 8,381 shares, increasing direct ownership by 37% to 31,225 units (SEC Form 4)
- Director Jones Jeffrey J Ii was granted 8,381 shares, increasing direct ownership by 403% to 10,461 units (SEC Form 4)
- Director Geballe Daniel W was granted 8,381 shares, increasing direct ownership by 71% to 20,172 units (SEC Form 4)
- Director Garten Yael was granted 8,381 shares, increasing direct ownership by 14% to 68,952 units (SEC Form 4)
- Director Eckert Robert was granted 8,381 shares, increasing direct ownership by 9% to 102,870 units (SEC Form 4)
- Director Beraud Jill was granted 8,381 shares, increasing direct ownership by 5% to 181,157 units (SEC Form 4)
Latest PASW
- SEC Form 3 filed by new insider Liu Pijun (Pjl)
- SEC Form 3 filed by new insider Liu Xianzhi (Xzl)
- SEC Form 3 filed by new insider Yang Hongli (Hly)
- SEC Form 6-K filed by Ping An Biomedical Co. Ltd.
- All Resolutions Passed at Ping An Biomedical AGM, Clearing Path for Restructured Share Capital
- SEC Form 3 filed by Ping An Biomedical Co. Ltd.
- SEC Form 3 filed by Ping An Biomedical Co. Ltd.
- SEC Form 6-K filed by Ping An Biomedical Co. Ltd.
- SEC Form EFFECT filed by Ping An Biomedical Co. Ltd.
- SEC Form F-1 filed by Ping An Biomedical Co. Ltd.