Bright Horizons Family Solutions vs KinderCare Learning Companies
BFAM and KLC side by side, both in industrials. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How BFAM and KLC compare
Bright Horizons Family Solutions is the larger company, worth 9.8 times as much as KinderCare Learning Companies ($2.5B against $254M).
Bright Horizons Family Solutions grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (6.7% versus 1.8% for KinderCare Learning Companies).
Bright Horizons Family Solutions keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of −4.4% compared with −17.2% at KinderCare Learning Companies.
Bright Horizons Family Solutions scores higher on the StockData Score (5 against 4 for KinderCare Learning Companies), 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 | BFAM | KLC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $2.5B | $254M |
| Share price | $51.91 | $2.14 |
| Change, 1 year | −47.6% | −58.9% |
| Change, 5 years | −58.9% | – |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.90 | 1.32 |
| Employees | 32K | 44K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 1 | 1 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/S | 0.8× | 0.1× (better) |
| P/B | 3.9× | 0.5× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 34.2× | – |
| P/FCF | 9.8× | 3.1× (better) |
| FCF yield | 10.2% | 31.9% (better) |
| Fair value | $30.34 | $11.84 |
| Margin of safety | −71.1% | 81.9% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 6.7% (better) | 1.8% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 14.1% | – |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −167% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −185% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 49.5% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 22.8% (better) | 19.2% |
| Operating margin | 0.10% (better) | −14.9% |
| Net margin | −4.4% (better) | −17.2% |
| FCF margin | 8.3% (better) | 3.0% |
| Return on equity | −13.0% (better) | −67.8% |
| Return on invested capital | 0.14% (better) | −21.8% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.69 (better) | 1.99 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 9.51 | – |
| Interest coverage | 0.1× (better) | −5.1× |
| Current ratio | 0.45 | 0.75 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.49 (better) | 0.26 |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Buyback yield | 27.3% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 27.3% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 115% | 91.8% |
| Held by insiders | 1.4% | 5.5% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$657K | $1.1M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 6.3% | 3.2% |
Go deeper
- BFAM stock overview
- BFAM income statement
- BFAM valuation and score
- KLC stock overview
- KLC income statement
- KLC valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.