Boise Cascade vs Weyerhaeuser
BCC and WY side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How BCC and WY compare
Weyerhaeuser is the larger company, worth 6.1 times as much as Boise Cascade ($14.9B against $2.4B).
On earnings, Boise Cascade is cheaper: it trades at 20.4× trailing earnings, against 32.8× for Weyerhaeuser.
Boise Cascade grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (1.2% versus −1.1% for Weyerhaeuser).
Weyerhaeuser keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 6.5% compared with 1.8% at Boise Cascade.
Both pay dividends: Boise Cascade yields 1.3% and Weyerhaeuser 4.1%.
Boise Cascade scores higher on the StockData Score (12 against 7 for Weyerhaeuser), 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 | BCC | WY |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $2.4B | $14.9B |
| Share price | $69.52 | $20.65 |
| Change, 1 year | −0.44% | −9.0% |
| Change, 5 years | −3.4% | −45.7% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.98 | 0.77 |
| Employees | 7,680 | 9,517 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 12 (better) | 7 |
| Valuation score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 1 | 1 |
| Performance score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 20.4× (better) | 32.8× |
| P/S | 0.4× (better) | 2.1× |
| P/B | 1.2× (better) | 1.6× |
| EV/EBITDA | 7.1× (better) | 14.9× |
| P/FCF | 18.2× | – |
| FCF yield | 5.5% | – |
| Fair value | $77.67 | $17.20 |
| Margin of safety | 10.5% (better) | −20.0% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 1.2% (better) | −1.1% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 3.2% (better) | −1.7% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −37.7% | 36.9% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −32.6% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −4.5% (better) | −15.9% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 16.7% (better) | 15.0% |
| Operating margin | 2.8% | 11.7% (better) |
| Net margin | 1.8% | 6.5% (better) |
| FCF margin | 2.0% | – |
| Return on equity | 5.7% (better) | 4.8% |
| Return on invested capital | 6.3% (better) | 5.8% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.22 (better) | 0.57 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.18 (better) | 3.75 |
| Interest coverage | 7.0× (better) | 3.1× |
| Current ratio | 2.82 (better) | 1.82 |
| Altman Z-score | 4.20 (better) | 2.03 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.3% | 4.1% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 28.4% | 134% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | −15.5% | 10.5% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 7.6% (better) | 0.27% |
| Shareholder yield | 8.9% (better) | 4.3% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 97.4% | 97.4% |
| Held by insiders | 1.6% | 0.40% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$666K (better) | −$1.7M |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 4.2% | 4.8% |
Go deeper
- BCC stock overview
- BCC income statement
- BCC valuation and score
- WY stock overview
- WY income statement
- WY valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.