Alamo vs Astec Industries
ALG and ASTE side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How ALG and ASTE compare
Alamo is the larger company, worth 2.0 times as much as Astec Industries ($1.7B against $863M).
On earnings, Alamo is cheaper: it trades at 22.1× trailing earnings, against 75.0× for Astec Industries.
Astec Industries grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (13.8% versus 1.8% for Alamo).
Alamo keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 4.7% compared with 0.74% at Astec Industries.
Both pay dividends: Alamo yields 0.96% and Astec Industries 1.0%.
Alamo scores higher on the StockData Score (14 against 8 for Astec Industries), 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 | ALG | ASTE |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $1.7B | $863M |
| Share price | $141.71 | $37.48 |
| Change, 1 year | −14.3% | −18.5% |
| Change, 5 years | −6.7% | −46.0% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.86 | 1.14 |
| Employees | 3,800 | 4,468 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 14 (better) | 8 |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Growth score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Performance score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 22.1× (better) | 75.0× |
| P/S | 1.0× | 0.6× (better) |
| P/B | 1.5× | 1.3× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 15.2× | 11.3× (better) |
| P/FCF | 12.6× (better) | 15.6× |
| PEG | 113.50 | – |
| FCF yield | 7.9% (better) | 6.4% |
| Fair value | $151.77 | $33.55 |
| Margin of safety | 6.6% (better) | −11.7% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 1.8% | 13.8% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 6.6% (better) | 6.6% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −33.3% (better) | −75.8% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −33.5% (better) | −76.0% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 12.0% (better) | −3.5% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 22.9% | 25.5% (better) |
| Operating margin | 6.9% (better) | 3.1% |
| Net margin | 4.7% (better) | 0.74% |
| FCF margin | 8.3% (better) | 3.6% |
| Return on equity | 6.7% (better) | 1.7% |
| Return on invested capital | 7.3% (better) | 2.5% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.20 (better) | 0.55 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.01 (better) | 2.98 |
| Interest coverage | 6.6× (better) | 1.7× |
| Current ratio | 4.19 (better) | 2.31 |
| Altman Z-score | 4.64 (better) | 2.86 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.96% | 1.0% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 20.5% | 103% |
| Years of dividend growth | 11 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 18.2% (better) | 3.4% |
| Buyback yield | 0.56% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 1.5% (better) | 1.0% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 97.9% | 98.1% |
| Held by insiders | 1.3% | 6.2% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$964K | −$59.5K (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 4.2% | 3.1% |
Go deeper
- ALG stock overview
- ALG income statement
- ALG valuation and score
- ASTE stock overview
- ASTE income statement
- ASTE valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.