Ampco Pittsburgh vs Graham
AP and GHM side by side, both in general industrial machinery and equipment. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How AP and GHM compare
Graham is the larger company, worth 6.7 times as much as Ampco Pittsburgh ($1.0B against $152M).
Graham grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (16.2% versus 1.3% for Ampco Pittsburgh).
Graham keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 5.0% compared with −13.1% at Ampco Pittsburgh.
Graham scores higher on the StockData Score (15 against 2 for Ampco Pittsburgh), 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 | AP | GHM |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $152M | $1.0B |
| Share price | $7.34 | $86.69 |
| Change, 1 year | 276% | 39.8% |
| Change, 5 years | 47.1% | 565% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.29 | 1.11 |
| Employees | 1,432 | 732 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 2 | 15 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Growth score | 0 | 5 (better) |
| Performance score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Health score | 2 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 75.4× |
| P/S | 0.4× (better) | 3.8× |
| P/B | 4.7× (better) | 5.1× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 36.5× |
| P/FCF | 12.8× (better) | 35.2× |
| PEG | – | 0.32 |
| FCF yield | 7.8% (better) | 2.8% |
| Fair value | – | $59.39 |
| Margin of safety | – | −46.0% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 1.3% | 16.2% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 5.7% | 20.3% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | −2.2% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | −6.5% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 36.1% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 18.9% | 25.0% (better) |
| Operating margin | −10.2% | 6.0% (better) |
| Net margin | −13.1% | 5.0% (better) |
| FCF margin | 2.7% | 10.9% (better) |
| Return on equity | −123% | 8.2% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | −21.6% | 11.5% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 3.76 (better) | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | −2.76 |
| Interest coverage | −4.0× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.68 (better) | 1.24 |
| Altman Z-score | 0.66 | 4.59 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Buyback yield | – | −5.0% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% (better) | −5.0% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 55.7% | 91.0% |
| Held by insiders | 44.8% | 6.3% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $29.4K | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 6.1% | 8.4% |
Go deeper
- AP stock overview
- AP income statement
- AP valuation and score
- GHM stock overview
- GHM income statement
- GHM valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.