Under Armour

NYS:UAA

Apparel/Footwear

Market Cap

$9.72bn

MID cap

Share Price ↑

$21.68 (1.21%)

YTD Return ↑

21.7294%

since start of 2019

P/E Ratio

—

UAA chart by TradingView

Source: FactSet financial data and analytics.

Corporate Values

Carbon Footprint
Pollution Prevention
Water Conservation
Data Privacy
Consumer Health
Employee Satisfaction
Workplace Safety
Corp Gov
Ethical Practices
Conflict Materials
Forced Labor
Gender Diversity

Legend

About

Apparel/Footwear Founded 1996

Under Armour, Inc. engages in the developing, marketing and distributing of branded performance apparel, footwear and accessories for men, women and youth. It operates through the following geographical segments: North America; Latin America; Asia-Pacific; and Europe, the Middle East, and Africa. The company was founded by Kevin A. Plank in 1996 and is headquartered in Baltimore, MD.

website

Source: FactSet Research Systems

Headquarters

1020 Hull Street

3rd floor

Baltimore, MD 21230-2080

1.410.454.6428

Executives

Name	Title	Gender
Kevin A. Plank, MBA	Chairman & Chief Executive Officer	Male
Kip J. Fulks	Chief Product Officer	Male
Lance Allega, MBA	Vice President-Investor Relations	Male
Kerry D. Chandler	Chief Human Resources Officer	Female
Paul Fipps	Chief Information Officer & EVP-Global Operations	Male
John P. Stanton	Secretary, Senior Vice President & General Counsel	Male
David E. Bergman	Chief Financial & Accounting Officer	Male
Clay Dean	Chief Innovation Officer	Male

Mindful Investing Summary

Legend

Carbon Footprint 2 N/A

Under Armour performs poorly among its competitors for its carbon footprint. A company’s performance in this category is based on its success in implementing energy efficiency measures. Investments in energy efficient technology, green building and sourcing of renewable energy can all lead to cost savings and reduce the company’s contribution to climate change.
Pollution Prevention 2 N/A

Under Armour performs poorly on this issue. Companies are evaluated on pollution prevention by the levels of waste (including hazardous waste) they produce and release into the environment, and can be affected by whether they develop products that can reduce exposure to pollution.
Water Conservation 1 N/A

Under Armour performs very poorly among its peers in this category. A company’s score in this category depends on its measures to minimize water usage and impacts on stressed or drought-prone water resources.
Data & Privacy Protection — N/A

Under Armour among its peers and competitors for data privacy and protection. Companies today digitally manage vast amounts of personal information about their clients. A company’s score on this issue is based on the systems, products and procedures it has in place to minimize the risk for data and privacy breaches.
Consumer Health, Wellness & Safety — N/A

Under Armour compared to its peers and competitors Companies in this category manage its product and safety risks.
Employee Ownership, Satisfaction, Benefits & Pay 5 N/A

Under Armour is a top performer among its peers for employee satisfaction and pay. A company’s score on this issue depends on its frequency and likelihood of labor disputes as well as its practices to keep and retain talent - such as compensation, family leave, employee health care and other benefits. Employers that are rated as good to work for consistently produce higher stock returns than their peers.
Workplace Health and Safety 1 N/A

Under Armour performs very poorly among its competitors on this issue. A company’s workplace health and safety is evaluated not only by the number of accidents and injuries in the workplace, but also by their safety policies, training procedures, and their investment in equipment that can reduce accidents.
Integrity of Corporate Governance 3 N/A

Under Armour is an average performer among its competitors on corporate governance. This score is determined by the company’s accounting practices, executive pay, board organization and ownership structure.
Ethical Practices — N/A

Under Armour compared to its peers and competitors. A company’s rating on this issue is based on its history of controversies related to unethical corporate behavior, such as false claims about their products, price fixing, executive misconduct, insider trading or fraudulent practices.
Usage of Conflict Materials — N/A

Under Armour among its competitors in this category. Certain products use raw materials that are commonly sourced from militias or other organizations that promote or engage in conflict in their region. To perform well in this category companies must provide adequate assurances that any of these metals used in their production are in fact from conflict-free sources.
Forced Labor 4 N/A

Under Armour performs well compared to its competitors on forced labor. A company’s score on this issue depends on its use of forced labor and on its work conditions for outsourced labor.
Diversity of Corporate Leadership 2 N/A

Under Armour performs poorly based on its peers as well as companies in similar geographic regions. Companies are assessed on factors such as board diversity and senior management diversity. Companies performing well on this issue typically are more profitable than its peers, while companies with very poor scores typically have greater stock price volatility and lower returns on capital.

Under Armour - Competitors and Related Companies

How Under Armour stacks up to its peers in the Apparel/Footwear industry or with competing business segments.

Under Armour

NYS:UAA

Apparel/Footwear

Market Cap

$9.72bn

MID cap

Share Price ↑

$21.68 (1.21%)

YTD Return ↑

21.7294%

since start of 2019

P/E Ratio

—

UAA chart by TradingView

Source: FactSet financial data and analytics.

Corporate Values

Carbon Footprint
Pollution Prevention
Water Conservation
Data Privacy
Consumer Health
Employee Satisfaction
Workplace Safety
Corp Gov
Ethical Practices
Conflict Materials
Forced Labor
Gender Diversity

Legend

Loading…