Acme United vs Sturm Ruger
ACU and RGR side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How ACU and RGR compare
Sturm Ruger is the larger company, worth 3.1 times as much as Acme United ($806M against $262M).
On earnings, Acme United is cheaper: it trades at 25.2× trailing earnings, against 50.0× for Sturm Ruger.
Acme United grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (13.1% versus 10.6% for Sturm Ruger).
Acme United keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 5.1% compared with 2.7% at Sturm Ruger.
Both pay dividends: Acme United yields 0.93% and Sturm Ruger 0.87%.
Acme United scores higher on the StockData Score (15 against 11 for Sturm Ruger), 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 | ACU | RGR |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $262M | $806M |
| Share price | $68.46 | $50.45 |
| Change, 1 year | 87.3% | 60.8% |
| Change, 5 years | 90.2% | −31.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.46 | 0.35 |
| Employees | 649 | 18 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 15 (better) | 11 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 25.2× (better) | 50.0× |
| P/S | 1.2× (better) | 1.3× |
| P/B | 2.1× (better) | 2.7× |
| EV/EBITDA | 12.0× (better) | 18.0× |
| P/FCF | 19.0× (better) | 29.2× |
| PEG | 0.56 | – |
| FCF yield | 5.3% (better) | 3.4% |
| Fair value | $56.81 | $27.46 |
| Margin of safety | −20.5% (better) | −83.7% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 13.1% (better) | 10.6% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 3.7% (better) | −0.82% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 13.3% | 530% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 11.5% | 677% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 1.5% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 41.7% (better) | 19.9% |
| Operating margin | 7.2% (better) | 2.5% |
| Net margin | 5.1% (better) | 2.7% |
| FCF margin | 6.3% (better) | 4.6% |
| Return on equity | 9.4% (better) | 5.7% |
| Return on invested capital | 9.5% (better) | 6.0% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.22 (better) | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.86 | – |
| Interest coverage | 7.7× | 75.1× (better) |
| Current ratio | 3.89 (better) | 3.02 |
| Altman Z-score | 4.45 | 9.27 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.93% (better) | 0.87% |
| Payout ratio | 21.5% | 42.8% |
| Years of dividend growth | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | −37.5% |
| Buyback yield | −1.0% | – |
| Shareholder yield | −0.08% | 0.87% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 73.6% | 59.9% |
| Held by insiders | 12.3% | 27.2% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$3.4M | $211K (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.5% | 9.7% |
Go deeper
- ACU stock overview
- ACU income statement
- ACU valuation and score
- RGR stock overview
- RGR income statement
- RGR valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.