Apogee Enterprises vs Tecnoglass
APOG and TGLS side by side, both in materials. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How APOG and TGLS compare
Tecnoglass is the larger company, worth 2.1 times as much as Apogee Enterprises ($2.1B against $986M).
On earnings, Apogee Enterprises is cheaper: it trades at 14.9× trailing earnings, against 21.1× for Tecnoglass.
Tecnoglass grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (12.5% versus 3.0% for Apogee Enterprises).
Tecnoglass keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 9.0% compared with 4.7% at Apogee Enterprises.
Both pay dividends: Apogee Enterprises yields 2.3% and Tecnoglass 0.96%.
Apogee Enterprises scores higher on the StockData Score (17 against 14 for Tecnoglass), 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 | APOG | TGLS |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $986M | $2.1B |
| Share price | $47.17 | $46.69 |
| Change, 1 year | 36.7% | 0.30% |
| Change, 5 years | 1.1% | 45.1% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.96 | 1.05 |
| Employees | 4,100 | 9,601 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 17 (better) | 14 |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 3 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 14.9× (better) | 21.1× |
| P/S | 0.7× (better) | 1.9× |
| P/B | 1.9× (better) | 2.5× |
| EV/EBITDA | 8.3× (better) | 11.2× |
| P/FCF | 10.4× | – |
| PEG | – | 14.03 |
| FCF yield | 9.7% (better) | −3.6% |
| Fair value | $58.14 | $40.03 |
| Margin of safety | 18.9% (better) | −16.6% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 3.0% | 12.5% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 2.7% | 21.2% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 51.0% (better) | −45.0% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 54.9% (better) | −42.6% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 33.7% | 46.3% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 23.2% | 37.3% (better) |
| Operating margin | 7.2% | 14.4% (better) |
| Net margin | 4.7% | 9.0% (better) |
| FCF margin | 6.6% (better) | −6.8% |
| Return on equity | 13.1% (better) | 12.6% |
| Return on invested capital | 9.5% | 11.7% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.64 | 0.36 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.93 | 0.95 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 8.3× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.78 | 1.90 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.88 | 3.75 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.3% (better) | 0.96% |
| Payout ratio | 33.3% | 27.2% |
| Years of dividend growth | 14 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 6.6% | – |
| Buyback yield | 3.2% | 5.0% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 5.4% | 6.0% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 93.4% | 46.2% |
| Held by insiders | 3.0% | 92.3% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$51.5K | $27.0M (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 4.2% | 62.9% |
Go deeper
- APOG stock overview
- APOG income statement
- APOG valuation and score
- TGLS stock overview
- TGLS income statement
- TGLS valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.