Climb Global Solutions vs PC Connection
CLMB and CNXN side by side, both in professional and commercial equipment and supplies. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CLMB and CNXN compare
PC Connection is the larger company, worth 2.7 times as much as Climb Global Solutions ($2.1B against $777M).
On earnings, PC Connection is cheaper: it trades at 20.5× trailing earnings, against 32.3× for Climb Global Solutions.
Climb Global Solutions grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (24.2% versus 9.5% for PC Connection).
PC Connection keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 3.3% compared with 3.1% at Climb Global Solutions.
PC Connection pays a dividend yielding 0.96%; Climb Global Solutions does not pay one.
PC Connection scores higher on the StockData Score (15 against 14 for Climb Global Solutions), 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 | CLMB | CNXN |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $777M | $2.1B |
| Share price | $41.67 | $82.91 |
| Change, 1 year | 50.7% | 40.3% |
| Change, 5 years | 433% | 75.1% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.85 | 0.77 |
| Employees | 412 | 2,525 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 14 | 15 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Health score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 32.3× | 20.5× (better) |
| P/S | 1.0× | 0.7× (better) |
| P/B | 5.8× | 2.1× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 18.3× | 12.7× (better) |
| PEG | 1.78 | – |
| FCF yield | – | −0.98% |
| Fair value | $24.47 | $74.38 |
| Margin of safety | −70.3% | −11.5% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 24.2% (better) | 9.5% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 21.0% (better) | 2.1% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 11.4% | 22.5% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 11.2% | 25.4% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 35.7% (better) | 9.1% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 15.5% | 18.6% (better) |
| Operating margin | 4.0% | 4.1% (better) |
| Net margin | 3.1% | 3.3% (better) |
| FCF margin | – | −0.65% |
| Return on equity | 19.5% (better) | 10.9% |
| Return on invested capital | 35.8% (better) | 16.4% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −1.72 | – |
| Current ratio | 1.14 | 2.72 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 3.30 | 6.30 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.00% | 0.96% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 3.3% | 18.4% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 0.00% | – |
| Buyback yield | 0.28% | 0.63% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 0.28% | 1.6% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 80.1% | 41.3% |
| Held by insiders | 4.7% | 100% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$609K (better) | −$19.1M |
| Short interest, % of float | 6.0% | – |
Go deeper
- CLMB stock overview
- CLMB income statement
- CLMB valuation and score
- CNXN stock overview
- CNXN income statement
- CNXN valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.