Aebi Schmidt vs Columbus McKinnon
AEBI and CMCO side by side, both in construction, mining, and materials handling. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How AEBI and CMCO compare
Aebi Schmidt is the larger company, worth 1.3 times as much as Columbus McKinnon ($804M against $597M).
Columbus McKinnon grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (55.2% versus 52.2% for Aebi Schmidt).
Aebi Schmidt keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 1.6% compared with −21.2% at Columbus McKinnon.
Both pay dividends: Aebi Schmidt yields 1.2% and Columbus McKinnon 1.4%.
Aebi Schmidt scores higher on the StockData Score (9 against 7 for Columbus McKinnon), 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 | AEBI | CMCO |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $804M | $597M |
| Share price | $10.36 | $20.70 |
| Change, 1 year | −3.4% | 31.0% |
| Change, 5 years | – | −57.9% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.38 | 1.29 |
| Employees | 5,700 | 7,300 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 9 (better) | 7 |
| Valuation score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Growth score | 1 | 1 |
| Performance score | 0 | 0 |
| Health score | 1 | 1 |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 25.9× | – |
| P/S | 0.4× | 0.4× (better) |
| P/B | 1.0× | 0.4× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 8.7× | – |
| P/FCF | 40.4× | – |
| FCF yield | 2.5% (better) | −20.5% |
| Fair value | $13.36 | $53.79 |
| Margin of safety | 22.5% | 61.5% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 52.2% | 55.2% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | – | 12.9% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 195% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 66.7% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 19.2% | 28.8% (better) |
| Operating margin | 4.7% (better) | −9.6% |
| Net margin | 1.6% (better) | −21.2% |
| FCF margin | 1.0% (better) | −8.2% |
| Return on equity | 3.7% (better) | −27.8% |
| Return on invested capital | 4.8% (better) | −4.5% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.70 (better) | 1.74 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.34 | – |
| Interest coverage | 2.1× | – |
| Current ratio | 2.08 (better) | 2.00 |
| Altman Z-score | 1.89 (better) | 0.48 |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.2% | 1.4% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 25.1% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 3.1% |
| Shareholder yield | 1.2% | 1.4% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | – | 88.9% |
| Held by insiders | 66.6% | 76.7% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $349K | $586K (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 6.5% | 36.7% |
Go deeper
- AEBI stock overview
- AEBI income statement
- AEBI valuation and score
- CMCO stock overview
- CMCO income statement
- CMCO valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.