Bowman Consulting vs Onterris
BWMN and ONT side by side, both in management and public relations services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How BWMN and ONT compare
Bowman Consulting and Onterris are about the same size, with market caps of $745M and $811M.
Bowman Consulting grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (16.0% versus −9.1% for Onterris).
Bowman Consulting keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of −0.22% compared with −1.4% at Onterris.
Onterris scores higher on the StockData Score (11 against 10 for Bowman Consulting), 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 | BWMN | ONT |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $745M | $811M |
| Share price | $43.00 | $23.08 |
| Change, 1 year | 1.1% | −4.6% |
| Change, 5 years | 156% | −69.7% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.94 | 1.31 |
| Employees | 2,300 | 3,500 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 10 | 11 (better) |
| Valuation score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Growth score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Performance score | 1 | 1 |
| Health score | 3 | 3 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/S | 1.4× | 1.1× (better) |
| P/B | 2.8× | 1.8× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 18.3× (better) | 18.6× |
| P/FCF | 178× | 11.6× (better) |
| FCF yield | 0.56% | 8.6% (better) |
| Fair value | $35.54 | $38.65 |
| Margin of safety | −21.0% | 40.3% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 16.0% (better) | −9.1% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 32.1% (better) | 20.4% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −107% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −110% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 33.8% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 53.0% (better) | 41.5% |
| Operating margin | 2.9% (better) | 1.3% |
| Net margin | −0.22% (better) | −1.4% |
| FCF margin | 0.76% | 9.3% (better) |
| Return on equity | −0.47% (better) | −2.3% |
| Return on invested capital | 4.7% (better) | 1.1% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.06 (better) | 0.72 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.28 (better) | 5.04 |
| Current ratio | 0.91 | 1.88 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.05 (better) | 1.50 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Buyback yield | 2.6% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 2.6% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 63.7% | 108% |
| Held by insiders | 12.9% | 9.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$5.6M | −$5.2M (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.0% | 15.0% |
Go deeper
- BWMN stock overview
- BWMN income statement
- BWMN valuation and score
- ONT stock overview
- ONT income statement
- ONT valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.