Ampco Pittsburgh vs Gorman Rupp
AP and GRC 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 GRC compare
Gorman Rupp is the larger company, worth 12 times as much as Ampco Pittsburgh ($1.9B against $159M).
Gorman Rupp grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (4.2% versus 3.3% for Ampco Pittsburgh).
Gorman Rupp keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 8.9% compared with −13.8% at Ampco Pittsburgh.
Gorman Rupp pays a dividend yielding 1.1%; Ampco Pittsburgh does not pay one.
Gorman Rupp scores higher on the StockData Score (13 against 1 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 | GRC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $159M | $1.9B |
| Share price | $7.70 | $71.93 |
| Change, 1 year | 238% | 61.2% |
| Change, 5 years | 53.4% | 54.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.21 | 0.79 |
| Employees | 1,432 | 1,415 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 1 | 13 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 0 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 30.4× |
| P/S | 0.4× (better) | 2.7× |
| P/B | 5.1× | 4.3× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 17.1× |
| P/FCF | – | 18.9× |
| FCF yield | −2.5% | 5.3% (better) |
| Fair value | – | $61.18 |
| Margin of safety | – | −17.6% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 3.3% | 4.2% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 5.7% | 14.4% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 20.3% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 20.3% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 18.8% | 31.4% (better) |
| Operating margin | −11.1% | 14.8% (better) |
| Net margin | −13.8% | 8.9% (better) |
| FCF margin | −0.93% | 14.3% (better) |
| Return on equity | −126% | 14.9% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | −21.6% | 11.6% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 4.42 | 0.62 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 1.86 |
| Interest coverage | −4.2× | 5.0× (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.78 | 2.81 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 0.64 | 4.83 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 3 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 1.1% |
| Buyback yield | – | 0.14% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 1.2% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 55.7% | 66.0% |
| Held by insiders | 44.8% | 14.8% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $418K (better) | −$400K |
| Short interest, % of float | 7.4% | 2.9% |
Go deeper
- AP stock overview
- AP income statement
- AP valuation and score
- GRC stock overview
- GRC income statement
- GRC valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.