Bowman Consulting vs Public Policy
BWMN and PPHC 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 PPHC compare
Bowman Consulting is the larger company, worth 2.4 times as much as Public Policy ($745M against $314M).
Bowman Consulting keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of −0.22% compared with −14.6% at Public Policy.
Public Policy pays a dividend yielding 3.4%; Bowman Consulting does not pay one.
Bowman Consulting scores higher on the StockData Score (10 against 3 for Public Policy), 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 | PPHC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $745M | $314M |
| Share price | $43.00 | $10.39 |
| Change, 1 year | 1.1% | – |
| Change, 5 years | 156% | – |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.94 | – |
| Employees | 2,300 | 450 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 10 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 5 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/S | 1.4× (better) | 1.5× |
| P/B | 2.8× | 2.7× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 18.3× | – |
| P/FCF | 178× | – |
| FCF yield | 0.56% (better) | −0.72% |
| Fair value | $35.21 | $7.07 |
| Margin of safety | −22.1% (better) | −47.0% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 16.0% | – |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 32.1% | – |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −107% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −110% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 33.8% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 53.0% (better) | 13.6% |
| Operating margin | 2.9% (better) | −18.1% |
| Net margin | −0.22% (better) | −14.6% |
| FCF margin | 0.76% (better) | −1.1% |
| Return on equity | −0.47% (better) | −30.3% |
| Return on invested capital | 4.7% (better) | −24.9% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.06 (better) | 0.34 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.28 | – |
| Interest coverage | – | −11.9× |
| Current ratio | 0.91 | 1.17 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.05 (better) | 0.68 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 3.4% |
| Buyback yield | 2.6% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 2.6% | 3.4% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 63.7% | 22.7% |
| Held by insiders | 12.9% | 15.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$5.6M | −$2.1M (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.0% | 1.7% |
Go deeper
- BWMN stock overview
- BWMN income statement
- BWMN valuation and score
- PPHC stock overview
- PPHC income statement
- PPHC valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.