Atmus Filtration Technologies vs Cooper-Standard
ATMU and CPS side by side, both in motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How ATMU and CPS compare
Atmus Filtration Technologies is the larger company, worth 10 times as much as Cooper-Standard ($3.7B against $357M).
Cooper-Standard grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (27.9% versus 13.1% for Atmus Filtration Technologies).
Atmus Filtration Technologies keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 11.3% compared with −1.7% at Cooper-Standard.
Atmus Filtration Technologies pays a dividend yielding 0.49%; Cooper-Standard does not pay one.
Atmus Filtration Technologies scores higher on the StockData Score (13 against 5 for Cooper-Standard), 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 | ATMU | CPS |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $3.7B | $357M |
| Share price | $45.69 | $20.07 |
| Change, 1 year | −3.1% | −48.0% |
| Change, 5 years | – | −7.9% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.97 | 2.33 |
| Employees | 4,500 | 22K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 13 (better) | 5 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 1 |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 1 |
| Dividend score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 17.4× | – |
| P/S | 2.0× | 0.1× (better) |
| P/B | 8.2× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 12.3× (better) | 13.5× |
| P/FCF | 19.6× | – |
| PEG | 2.55 | – |
| FCF yield | 5.1% (better) | −7.9% |
| Fair value | $36.30 | – |
| Margin of safety | −25.9% | – |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 13.1% | 27.9% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 14.1% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 15.9% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 28.8% (better) | 12.0% |
| Operating margin | 17.2% (better) | 2.9% |
| Net margin | 11.3% (better) | −1.7% |
| FCF margin | 10.0% (better) | −0.81% |
| Return on equity | 55.8% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 26.6% (better) | 9.3% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 2.20 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.03 (better) | 10.06 |
| Interest coverage | 7.4× | – |
| Current ratio | 2.65 (better) | 1.36 |
| Altman Z-score | 3.93 (better) | 1.90 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.49% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 1 | – |
| Buyback yield | 1.4% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 1.9% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 107% | 64.9% |
| Held by insiders | 0.88% | 5.5% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$1.6M | $295K (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 4.2% | 4.1% |
Go deeper
- ATMU stock overview
- ATMU income statement
- ATMU valuation and score
- CPS stock overview
- CPS income statement
- CPS valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.