BorgWarner vs Magna International
BWA and MGA side by side, both in motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How BWA and MGA compare
BorgWarner grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (0.40% versus −1.9% for Magna International).
BorgWarner keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 3.4% compared with 2.0% at Magna International.
BorgWarner pays a dividend yielding 1.3%; Magna International does not pay one.
BorgWarner scores higher on the StockData Score (13 against 8 for Magna International), 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 | BWA | MGA |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $10.9B | – |
| Share price | $53.30 | $63.82 |
| Change, 1 year | 22.4% | 40.3% |
| Change, 5 years | 13.6% | −23.3% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.91 | 1.11 |
| Employees | 700 | 125K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 13 (better) | 8 |
| Valuation score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 22.7× | – |
| P/S | 0.8× | – |
| P/B | 1.9× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 9.0× | – |
| P/FCF | 9.4× | – |
| FCF yield | 10.6% | – |
| Fair value | $45.65 | – |
| Margin of safety | −16.7% | – |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 0.40% (better) | −1.9% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 7.1% (better) | 5.2% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 257% (better) | −17.8% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 273% (better) | −16.8% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −11.4% | 3.1% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 19.6% (better) | 14.3% |
| Operating margin | 5.4% | – |
| Net margin | 3.4% (better) | 2.0% |
| FCF margin | 8.1% (better) | 5.4% |
| Return on equity | 8.2% (better) | 6.9% |
| Return on invested capital | 6.4% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.53 | 0.38 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.03 | – |
| Interest coverage | 8.7× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.41 (better) | 1.25 |
| Altman Z-score | 3.09 | – |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.3% | – |
| Payout ratio | 29.1% | 65.6% |
| Years of dividend growth | 1 | 16 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | −3.8% | 3.9% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 6.7% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 7.9% | – |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 106% | 63.9% |
| Held by insiders | 0.86% | 0.00% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$17.1M | – |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.5% | 2.7% |
Go deeper
- BWA stock overview
- BWA income statement
- BWA valuation and score
- MGA stock overview
- MGA income statement
- MGA valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.