Cato vs J.Jill
CATO and JILL side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CATO and JILL compare
J.Jill is the larger company, worth 7.7 times as much as Cato ($356M against $46.0M).
Cato grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (−1.1% versus −2.2% for J.Jill).
J.Jill keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 4.6% compared with −0.87% at Cato.
J.Jill pays a dividend yielding 1.5%; Cato does not pay one.
J.Jill scores higher on the StockData Score (13 against 9 for Cato), 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 | CATO | JILL |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $46.0M | $356M |
| Share price | $2.31 | $23.96 |
| Change, 1 year | −40.2% | 55.6% |
| Change, 5 years | −88.1% | 22.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.62 | 0.93 |
| Employees | 6,700 | 3,140 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 9 | 13 (better) |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Growth score | 1 | 1 |
| Performance score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 13.4× |
| P/S | 0.1× (better) | 0.6× |
| P/B | 0.3× (better) | 2.5× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 5.1× |
| P/FCF | 28.3× | 7.3× (better) |
| FCF yield | 3.5% | 13.7% (better) |
| Fair value | $9.49 | $26.18 |
| Margin of safety | 75.7% (better) | 8.5% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −1.1% (better) | −2.2% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 2.6% | 6.9% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | −26.2% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | −25.1% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 33.6% | 70.0% (better) |
| Operating margin | −2.1% | 8.1% (better) |
| Net margin | −0.87% | 4.6% (better) |
| FCF margin | 0.25% | 8.3% (better) |
| Return on equity | −3.3% | 20.8% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | −13.7% | 31.8% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.52 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | −0.06 |
| Interest coverage | – | 5.5× |
| Current ratio | 1.36 (better) | 1.30 |
| Altman Z-score | 1.80 | 2.13 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.00% | 1.5% (better) |
| Payout ratio | – | 18.8% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Buyback yield | 0.92% | 2.3% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 0.92% | 3.8% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 29.4% | 50.2% |
| Held by insiders | 1.2% | 7.5% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | – | −$1.6M |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.9% | 6.7% |
Go deeper
- CATO stock overview
- CATO income statement
- CATO valuation and score
- JILL stock overview
- JILL income statement
- JILL valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.