Aterian vs Hamilton Beach Brands
ATER and HBB side by side, both in electronic and other electrical equipment and components, except computer equipment. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How ATER and HBB compare
Hamilton Beach Brands is the larger company, worth 25 times as much as Aterian ($410M against $16.6M).
Hamilton Beach Brands grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (1.7% versus −33.0% for Aterian).
Hamilton Beach Brands keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 9.6% compared with −49.3% at Aterian.
Hamilton Beach Brands pays a dividend yielding 1.6%; Aterian does not pay one.
Hamilton Beach Brands scores higher on the StockData Score (24 against 5 for Aterian), 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 | ATER | HBB |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $16.6M | $410M |
| Share price | $0.925 | $30.49 |
| Change, 1 year | 7.0% | 119% |
| Change, 5 years | −98.6% | 84.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.53 | 0.86 |
| Employees | 74 | 660 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 5 | 24 (better) |
| Valuation score | 3 | 6 (better) |
| Growth score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 1 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 1 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 6.9× |
| P/S | 0.5× (better) | 0.7× |
| P/B | 1.3× (better) | 1.9× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 3.6× |
| P/FCF | – | 3.8× |
| PEG | – | 2.76 |
| FCF yield | −15.6% | 26.2% (better) |
| Fair value | $2.21 | $81.56 |
| Margin of safety | 58.1% | 62.6% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −33.0% | 1.7% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | −18.0% | 0.10% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 85.9% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 88.4% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | −10.4% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 56.1% (better) | 34.4% |
| Operating margin | −49.6% | 12.6% (better) |
| Net margin | −49.3% | 9.6% (better) |
| FCF margin | −7.6% | 17.4% (better) |
| Return on equity | −91.3% | 30.8% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | −112% | 42.1% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 0.00 |
| Interest coverage | −16.4× | – |
| Current ratio | 2.13 | 2.43 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | −43.25 | 4.39 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 1.6% |
| Payout ratio | – | 11.1% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 8 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 5.1% |
| Buyback yield | – | 1.2% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 2.8% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 3.8% | 28.0% |
| Held by insiders | – | 58.8% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | – | −$97.5K |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 9.7% |
Go deeper
- ATER stock overview
- ATER income statement
- ATER valuation and score
- HBB stock overview
- HBB income statement
- HBB valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.