Build-A-Bear Workshop vs Sportsman's Warehouse
BBW and SPWH side by side, both in miscellaneous retail. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How BBW and SPWH compare
Build-A-Bear Workshop is the larger company, worth 7.9 times as much as Sportsman's Warehouse ($353M against $44.6M).
Sportsman's Warehouse grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (0.84% versus −0.91% for Build-A-Bear Workshop).
Build-A-Bear Workshop keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 10.0% compared with −3.9% at Sportsman's Warehouse.
Build-A-Bear Workshop pays a dividend yielding 3.2%; Sportsman's Warehouse does not pay one.
Build-A-Bear Workshop scores higher on the StockData Score (18 against 6 for Sportsman's Warehouse), 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 | BBW | SPWH |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $353M | $44.6M |
| Share price | $28.69 | $1.14 |
| Change, 1 year | −41.1% | −46.0% |
| Change, 5 years | 58.2% | −93.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.86 | 0.45 |
| Employees | 5,500 | 5,400 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 18 (better) | 6 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Growth score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 7.1× | – |
| P/S | 0.7× | 0.0× (better) |
| P/B | 2.2× | 0.3× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 4.1× (better) | 31.2× |
| P/FCF | 14.4× | 1.4× (better) |
| PEG | 0.87 | – |
| FCF yield | 6.9% | 71.1% (better) |
| Fair value | $50.42 | $6.95 |
| Margin of safety | 43.1% | 83.6% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −0.91% | 0.84% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 15.7% (better) | −3.6% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −12.9% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −9.6% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 56.7% (better) | 30.9% |
| Operating margin | – | −2.8% |
| Net margin | 10.0% (better) | −3.9% |
| FCF margin | 4.7% (better) | 2.6% |
| Return on equity | 32.8% (better) | −25.8% |
| Return on invested capital | – | −11.7% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.27 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 15.12 |
| Interest coverage | – | −2.6× |
| Current ratio | 1.60 (better) | 1.17 |
| Altman Z-score | 3.39 (better) | 1.57 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 3.2% | – |
| Payout ratio | 22.2% | – |
| Buyback yield | 10.6% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 13.8% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 104% | 55.1% |
| Held by insiders | 4.7% | 8.7% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$376K | – |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 23.1% | 1.3% |
Go deeper
- BBW stock overview
- BBW income statement
- BBW valuation and score
- SPWH stock overview
- SPWH income statement
- SPWH valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.