Old Navy vs H&M: which short wins?
Both land in the budget tier — the Old Navy Built-In Flex Rotation Chino Short at $25, the H&M Cotton Shorts at $25. Here's how they stack up, head to head.
Comparing the brands overall, not just these two? H&M vs Old Navy, the whole-brand comparison →
| Old Navy | H&M | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $25 | $25 |
| Material | Soft-washed cotton-blend twill with a little spandex for the Built-In Flex stretch — light, casual, comfortable rather than heavy or rugged. | Lightweight stretch cotton twill (cotton with a touch of elastane), thin-handed and prone to creasing. |
| Fit | Slim, straight cut offered across a range of inseams (roughly 5" to 10"); generally true to size but slightly trim through the thigh. | Slim-to-regular chino cut with roughly a 9-inch inseam and mid rise; the slim runs short and tight through the thigh and seat, so size up if you're muscular. |
| Quality | Budget — comfortable stretch and clean enough out of the box, but the cloth thins, the color fades, and the seat and waistband loosen within a season or two. | Budget fast-fashion — basic stitching, thin twill that thins and fades within a season; fly, pockets, and waistband finishing are the weak points. |
| Best for | Casual summer rotation, comfortable stretch, and cheap stocking-up across inseam lengths. | Trend colors on a tight budget, casual summer rotation, and anyone who wants cheap shorts they won't mind replacing next year. |
| Care | Cold wash and tumble low or hang to slow the fade and keep the stretch from going slack. | Cold wash inside-out and hang or tumble low to slow the fading and creasing; hot washes and the dryer age the thin cotton fast. |
Both shorts land at the same $25 price point and share nearly identical construction — slim chino cut, stretch cotton-twill, budget stitching, and a one-to-two-season lifespan before fading and loosening set in. The Old Navy option adds meaningful inseam variety (roughly 5" to 10") and a slightly more robust twill hand, while the H&M version leans on trend color availability and a more relaxed fit ceiling if sized up. At zero price difference, the choice is purely about what each short does better, not whether a premium is justified.
- The case for Old Navy
- Old Navy wins on inseam range — offering multiple lengths across the same short gives taller, shorter, or fit-specific buyers an option the H&M's single 9-inch inseam simply cannot match.
- The case for H&M
- H&M wins on trend color access — it cycles seasonal shades at the same low price, making it the more practical choice for anyone who wants a current color and accepts up-front that the short is disposable.
The bottom lineWhich should you buy?
Buy the Old Navy if inseam fit matters — anyone outside the standard 9-inch length will wear a better-fitting short for the same money, and the slightly sturdier twill gives it a marginal edge in longevity. Buy the H&M if the specific color it's offering this season is the point and fit is easy to achieve by sizing up through the thigh. The price gap justifies nothing because there is no gap — this is a feature-preference call, not a value call.
We may earn a commission if you buy through this link, at no extra cost to you.