As noted, the leverage is deliberate, and probably is designed to deliver these ROEs to shareholders. H&M pays out a large portion of its profits as dividends. Nordstrom's dividend is healthy for an American company, but far less than that of H&M. Nordstrom shareholders must rely on capital gains to a greater extent. Given that both companies are growing, H&M's ability to deliver both growth and dividends is superior for shareholders. These superior outcomes are, not surprisingly, reflected in the share prices of the two firms, with H&M having the better P/E ratio (22.2 versus 15.4).

In addition to the financials, it is important to consider what recent news might affect the viability of working in these firms in the future. There are no major news stories for either company. Essentially, both are still growing firms, with a moderate growth pace. Nordstrom is still focused on the North American market, while H&M has a more global outlook to its expansion plans. Nordstrom's debt notwithstanding, the company has weathered the economic downturn well (it was always profitable) and the company should see recovery as the pace of recovery in the U.S. picks up. H&M has retained strong profitability as well, and has grown faster than Nordstrom. H&M is also better diversified geographically, which allows it to ride out economic weakness better than Nordstrom. That said, there are no red flags for either company with respect to their long-term direction. Neither is a takeover candidate at this time, for example.

If my job is in the accounting department, however, it might be worth considering that H&M uses IFRS and Nordstrom uses GAAP. It is no stretch to say that this could be an issue, because I am more familiar with GAAP and I find it the superior system. That said, understanding IFRS is going to be essential -- even with the slow pace of the convergence process it is something I will need to deal with eventually.

The current market environment is probably a little...

While the U.S. is experiencing a sluggish recovery from economic downturn, Nordstrom's targeting of wealthier customers (who are less affected by downturns) has allowed it to maintain profitability. The company will pick up aspirational customers as the U.S. economy recovers. H&M may have a bigger global footprint, but Europe is its heartland. The company is expected to succeed in the U.S. -- it had lineups when it launched a store on South Beach, for example (Edgerton, 2012). Its dependence on the European market is not a positive trend for it, however. While Sweden is outside the Eurozone, H&M's business within the Eurozone is likely to suffer from the ongoing Euro crisis and the woefully ill-conceived austerity policies that keep pushing Europe back into recession, stealing defeat from the jaws of victory. H&M, it should be noted, will probably turn to foreign markets for future growth, and it has much more room to grow than does Nordstrom. Despite Nordstrom's success, until it expands beyond the U.S. And Canada, its growth will be constrained relative to that of H&M.
All told, based on the future prospects for these two companies, and based on their financials today, H&M is the better of the two for a long-term career. While this unfortunately means dealing in the clunky IFRS, that is a small price to pay for involvement in a well-run company with great financials and impressive growth prospects.

Works Cited:

MSN Moneycentral. (2013). Nordstrom. Retrieved April 20, 2013 from http://investing.money.msn.com/investments/stock-balance-sheet/?symbol=us%3AJWN&stmtView=Ann

MSN Moneycentral. (2013). Hennes & Mauritz. Retrieved April 20, 2013 from http://investing.money.msn.com/investments/stock-income-statement/?symbol=HM

Edgerton, a. (2012). Thousands celebrate H&M's South Beach debut. Miami Herald. Retrieved April 20, 2013 from http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/11/08/3087998/thousands-celebrate-hms-south.html