Alliance Laundry vs Tennant
ALH and TNC side by side, both in industrial and commercial machinery and computer equipment. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How ALH and TNC compare
Alliance Laundry is the larger company, worth 3.7 times as much as Tennant ($4.8B against $1.3B).
On earnings, Alliance Laundry is cheaper: it trades at 23.3× trailing earnings, against 75.5× for Tennant.
Alliance Laundry grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (7.8% versus −2.9% for Tennant).
Alliance Laundry keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 11.7% compared with 1.5% at Tennant.
Tennant pays a dividend yielding 1.6%; Alliance Laundry does not pay one.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | ALH | TNC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $4.8B | $1.3B |
| Share price | $24.20 | $76.25 |
| Change, 1 year | −9.5% | 3.1% |
| Change, 5 years | – | −7.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.47 | 0.86 |
| Employees | 3,923 | 4,484 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 8 | 8 |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 1 | 1 |
| Performance score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Health score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 23.3× (better) | 75.5× |
| P/S | 2.7× | 1.1× (better) |
| P/B | 9.8× | 2.4× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 10.5× (better) | 40.7× |
| P/FCF | 17.3× | – |
| FCF yield | 5.8% (better) | −0.21% |
| Fair value | $30.91 | $34.25 |
| Margin of safety | 21.7% (better) | −123% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 7.8% (better) | −2.9% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | – | 3.8% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 78.7% (better) | −69.9% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 52.9% (better) | −68.5% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 5.5% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 38.3% | 38.8% (better) |
| Operating margin | 19.6% (better) | 3.2% |
| Net margin | 11.7% (better) | 1.5% |
| FCF margin | 15.4% (better) | −0.22% |
| Return on equity | 119% (better) | 3.1% |
| Return on invested capital | 634% (better) | 3.6% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 0.67 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 7.25 |
| Interest coverage | 4.3× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.35 | 2.04 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.28 | 3.04 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.00% | 1.6% (better) |
| Payout ratio | – | 119% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 16 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 6.1% |
| Buyback yield | 1.6% | 9.1% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 1.6% | 10.7% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 100.0% | 108% |
| Held by insiders | – | 6.9% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$599M | $882K (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 8.4% |
Go deeper
- ALH stock overview
- ALH income statement
- ALH valuation and score
- TNC stock overview
- TNC income statement
- TNC valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.