Boot Barn vs Shoe Station
BOOT and SHOE side by side, both in apparel and accessory stores. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How BOOT and SHOE compare
Boot Barn is the larger company, worth 10 times as much as Shoe Station ($4.0B against $399M).
On earnings, Shoe Station is cheaper: it trades at 16.7× trailing earnings, against 16.7× for Boot Barn.
Boot Barn grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (17.6% versus −4.1% for Shoe Station).
Boot Barn keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 10.4% compared with 2.2% at Shoe Station.
Shoe Station pays a dividend yielding 4.5%; Boot Barn does not pay one.
Boot Barn scores higher on the StockData Score (18 against 16 for Shoe Station), 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 | BOOT | SHOE |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $4.0B | $399M |
| Share price | $132.24 | $14.66 |
| Change, 1 year | −31.9% | −21.2% |
| Change, 5 years | 12.1% | −63.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.62 | 1.05 |
| Employees | 8,900 | 5,000 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 18 (better) | 16 |
| Valuation score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 1 |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 6 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 16.7× | 16.7× (better) |
| P/S | 1.7× | 0.4× (better) |
| P/B | 2.9× | 0.6× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 12.1× | 4.0× (better) |
| P/FCF | 34.3× | 6.0× (better) |
| PEG | 1.79 | – |
| FCF yield | 2.9% | 16.7% (better) |
| Fair value | $130.23 | $18.76 |
| Margin of safety | −1.5% | 21.9% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 17.6% (better) | −4.1% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 20.3% (better) | 3.1% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 24.1% (better) | −61.1% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 24.4% (better) | −61.2% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 29.6% (better) | 27.7% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 38.5% (better) | 34.5% |
| Operating margin | 13.6% (better) | 2.8% |
| Net margin | 10.4% (better) | 2.2% |
| FCF margin | 5.0% | 6.0% (better) |
| Return on equity | 19.2% (better) | 3.6% |
| Return on invested capital | 21.0% (better) | 3.9% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Interest coverage | – | 79.2× |
| Current ratio | 2.53 | 4.04 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 4.27 (better) | 2.94 |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 4.5% |
| Payout ratio | – | 73.4% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 3 |
| Buyback yield | 1.6% (better) | −0.04% |
| Shareholder yield | 1.6% | 4.5% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 115% | 73.0% |
| Held by insiders | 0.68% | 35.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$1.7M | $500K (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 8.7% | 53.9% |
Go deeper
- BOOT stock overview
- BOOT income statement
- BOOT valuation and score
- SHOE stock overview
- SHOE income statement
- SHOE valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.