Atlas Trinity Tech vs Hamilton Beach Brands
ATTT 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 ATTT and HBB compare
Atlas Trinity Tech grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (81.1% versus 1.7% for Hamilton Beach Brands).
Atlas Trinity Tech keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 11.7% compared with 9.6% at Hamilton Beach Brands.
Hamilton Beach Brands pays a dividend yielding 1.6%; Atlas Trinity Tech does not pay one.
Hamilton Beach Brands scores higher on the StockData Score (24 against 9 for Atlas Trinity Tech), 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 | ATTT | HBB |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | – | $419M |
| Share price | $2.02 | $31.16 |
| Change, 1 year | −17.9% | 123% |
| Change, 5 years | – | 88.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.42 | 0.86 |
| Employees | 18 | 660 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 9 | 24 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 6 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 3 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 7.1× |
| P/S | – | 0.7× |
| P/B | – | 1.9× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 3.7× |
| P/FCF | – | 3.9× |
| PEG | – | 2.82 |
| FCF yield | – | 25.6% |
| Fair value | – | $79.99 |
| Margin of safety | – | 61.0% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 81.1% (better) | 1.7% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | – | 0.10% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 102% (better) | 85.9% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −5.4% | 88.4% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | −10.4% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | – | 34.4% |
| Operating margin | 12.6% (better) | 12.6% |
| Net margin | 11.7% (better) | 9.6% |
| FCF margin | – | 17.4% |
| Return on equity | 16.2% | 30.8% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 50.8% (better) | 42.1% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.11 (better) | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −3.52 | – |
| Interest coverage | 74.1× | – |
| Current ratio | 2.36 | 2.43 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | – | 4.42 |
| Piotroski F-score | 2 | 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 | – | 1.1% |
| Shareholder yield | – | 2.7% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 0.72% | 28.0% |
| Held by insiders | 45.9% | 58.8% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | – | −$97.5K |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 9.7% |
Go deeper
- ATTT stock overview
- ATTT income statement
- ATTT 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.