Alpha Metallurgical Resources vs NACCO Industries
AMR and NC side by side, both in energy. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How AMR and NC compare
Alpha Metallurgical Resources is the larger company, worth 7.5 times as much as NACCO Industries ($2.0B against $266M).
NACCO Industries grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (0.54% versus −5.7% for Alpha Metallurgical Resources).
NACCO Industries keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 5.3% compared with −2.4% at Alpha Metallurgical Resources.
NACCO Industries pays a dividend yielding 2.9%; Alpha Metallurgical Resources does not pay one.
NACCO Industries scores higher on the StockData Score (10 against 8 for Alpha Metallurgical Resources), 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 | AMR | NC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $2.0B | $266M |
| Share price | $156.98 | $35.23 |
| Change, 1 year | −5.0% | −22.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 240% | 15.0% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.85 | 0.61 |
| Employees | 3,960 | 1,700 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 8 | 10 (better) |
| Valuation score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 1 | 1 |
| Performance score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 17.9× |
| P/S | 0.9× | 0.9× (better) |
| P/B | 1.3× | 0.6× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 16.2× | 4.4× (better) |
| FCF yield | −0.69% | – |
| Fair value | $158.06 | $33.85 |
| Margin of safety | 0.68% (better) | −4.1% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −5.7% | 0.54% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 8.5% | 16.6% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | −48.4% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | −49.4% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 2.3% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 9.3% | 18.9% (better) |
| Operating margin | −2.4% | 9.1% (better) |
| Net margin | −2.4% | 5.3% (better) |
| FCF margin | −0.66% | – |
| Return on equity | −3.2% | 3.4% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | −3.4% | 5.1% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.01 (better) | 0.02 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −3.14 | −0.97 |
| Interest coverage | −14.4× | 4.0× (better) |
| Current ratio | 3.00 | 3.16 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 4.00 (better) | 2.20 |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 2.9% |
| Payout ratio | – | 51.8% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 7 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 5.1% |
| Buyback yield | – | 0.69% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 3.6% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 88.0% | 28.2% |
| Held by insiders | 20.3% | 31.5% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $49.6M (better) | −$383K |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 14.3% | 1.7% |
Go deeper
- AMR stock overview
- AMR income statement
- AMR valuation and score
- NC stock overview
- NC income statement
- NC valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.