American States Water vs California Water Service
AWR and CWT side by side, both in water supply. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How AWR and CWT compare
American States Water and California Water Service are about the same size, with market caps of $3.4B and $3.0B.
On earnings, California Water Service is cheaper: it trades at 21.7× trailing earnings, against 23.6× for American States Water.
American States Water grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (13.2% versus 4.8% for California Water Service).
American States Water keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 20.5% compared with 13.5% at California Water Service.
Both pay dividends: American States Water yields 2.4% and California Water Service 2.7%.
American States Water scores higher on the StockData Score (15 against 9 for California Water Service), 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 | AWR | CWT |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $3.4B | $3.0B |
| Share price | $86.32 | $48.50 |
| Change, 1 year | 18.8% | 2.2% |
| Change, 5 years | −8.4% | −24.1% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.31 | 0.35 |
| Employees | 900 | 1,336 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 15 (better) | 9 |
| Valuation score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Health score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend score | 3 | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 23.6× | 21.7× (better) |
| P/S | 4.9× | 2.9× (better) |
| P/B | 3.1× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 15.1× | 13.5× (better) |
| P/FCF | 165× | – |
| PEG | 1.40 (better) | 3.23 |
| FCF yield | 0.61% | – |
| Fair value | $79.63 | $55.96 |
| Margin of safety | −8.4% | 13.3% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 13.2% (better) | 4.8% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 6.2% | 6.7% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 14.7% (better) | 0.74% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 12.0% (better) | −2.2% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 7.7% (better) | 1.8% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 90.1% | – |
| Operating margin | 31.8% (better) | 19.4% |
| Net margin | 20.5% (better) | 13.5% |
| FCF margin | 3.0% | – |
| Return on equity | 13.7% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 9.5% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.64 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.56 (better) | 4.71 |
| Interest coverage | 4.7× (better) | 2.5× |
| Current ratio | 0.98 (better) | 0.71 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.08 (better) | 0.86 |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.4% | 2.7% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 54.8% | 57.4% |
| Years of dividend growth | 16 (better) | 15 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 8.7% (better) | 7.8% |
| Buyback yield | −2.4% (better) | −4.9% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.01% (better) | −2.2% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 83.1% | 89.5% |
| Held by insiders | 1.0% | 0.77% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$247K (better) | −$641K |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.5% | 4.0% |
Go deeper
- AWR stock overview
- AWR income statement
- AWR valuation and score
- CWT stock overview
- CWT income statement
- CWT valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.