Barnes & Noble Education vs Sportsman's Warehouse
BNED 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 BNED and SPWH compare
Barnes & Noble Education is the larger company, worth 11 times as much as Sportsman's Warehouse ($439M against $41.5M).
Barnes & Noble Education grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (5.0% versus 0.84% for Sportsman's Warehouse).
Barnes & Noble Education keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 1.3% compared with −3.9% at Sportsman's Warehouse.
Barnes & Noble Education pays a dividend yielding 1.3%; Sportsman's Warehouse does not pay one.
Barnes & Noble Education scores higher on the StockData Score (14 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 | BNED | SPWH |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $439M | $41.5M |
| Share price | $12.67 | $1.06 |
| Change, 1 year | 39.5% | −59.7% |
| Change, 5 years | −98.8% | −93.9% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.51 | 0.46 |
| Employees | 6,500 | 5,400 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 14 (better) | 6 |
| Valuation score | 3 | 3 |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 19.8× | – |
| P/S | 0.3× | 0.0× (better) |
| P/B | 1.6× | 0.3× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 5.8× (better) | 30.1× |
| P/FCF | 9.0× | 1.3× (better) |
| FCF yield | 11.1% | 76.4% (better) |
| Fair value | $15.64 | $6.60 |
| Margin of safety | 19.0% | 83.9% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 5.0% (better) | 0.84% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.0% (better) | −3.6% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 12.1% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −36.0% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 21.4% | 30.9% (better) |
| Operating margin | 2.5% (better) | −2.8% |
| Net margin | 1.3% (better) | −3.9% |
| FCF margin | 2.8% (better) | 2.6% |
| Return on equity | 8.3% (better) | −25.8% |
| Return on invested capital | 13.2% (better) | −11.7% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.27 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 15.12 |
| Interest coverage | – | −2.6× |
| Current ratio | 1.66 (better) | 1.17 |
| Altman Z-score | 1.82 (better) | 1.57 |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.3% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 1.3% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 76.6% | 55.1% |
| Held by insiders | 72.8% | 8.8% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$1.4M | $0 (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 20.0% | 0.98% |
Go deeper
- BNED stock overview
- BNED income statement
- BNED 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.