ABM Industries vs APi
ABM and APG side by side, both in business services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How ABM and APG compare
APi is the larger company, worth 6.1 times as much as ABM Industries ($19.2B against $3.1B).
APi grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (16.4% versus 6.0% for ABM Industries).
APi keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 4.1% compared with 1.8% at ABM Industries.
ABM Industries pays a dividend yielding 2.2%; APi does not pay one.
ABM Industries scores higher on the StockData Score (13 against 6 for APi), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | ABM | APG |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $3.1B | $19.2B |
| Share price | $53.48 | $44.34 |
| Change, 1 year | 24.2% | 28.7% |
| Change, 5 years | 11.4% | 187% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.88 | 1.26 |
| Employees | 113K | 20K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 13 (better) | 6 |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 1 | 1 |
| Performance score | 3 | 3 |
| Health score | 2 | 2 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 19.3× | – |
| P/S | 0.3× (better) | 2.2× |
| P/B | 1.8× (better) | 5.5× |
| EV/EBITDA | 11.0× (better) | 34.7× |
| P/FCF | 10.0× (better) | 28.5× |
| FCF yield | 10.0% (better) | 3.5% |
| Fair value | $61.17 | $23.01 |
| Margin of safety | 12.6% (better) | −92.7% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 6.0% | 16.4% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 7.9% | 17.1% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 43.6% (better) | 34.9% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 49.7% (better) | −281% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 12.0% | 31.1% (better) |
| Operating margin | 3.5% | 7.2% (better) |
| Net margin | 1.8% | 4.1% (better) |
| FCF margin | 3.4% | 7.6% (better) |
| Return on equity | 9.2% | 10.9% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 7.2% | 7.9% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.99 (better) | 1.02 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.83 (better) | 4.97 |
| Interest coverage | 3.0× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.42 (better) | 1.18 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.80 | 2.93 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 | 8 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.2% | – |
| Payout ratio | 40.5% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 16 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 7.5% | – |
| Buyback yield | 5.4% (better) | 1.3% |
| Shareholder yield | 7.5% (better) | 1.3% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 101% | 84.9% |
| Held by insiders | 1.7% | 15.0% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$4.4M (better) | −$361M |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.5% | 2.6% |
Go deeper
- ABM stock overview
- ABM income statement
- ABM valuation and score
- APG stock overview
- APG income statement
- APG valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.