Columbus McKinnon vs Manitowoc
CMCO and MTW side by side, both in construction, mining, and materials handling. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CMCO and MTW compare
Manitowoc is the larger company, worth 1.4 times as much as Columbus McKinnon ($859M against $597M).
Columbus McKinnon grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (55.2% versus 10.2% for Manitowoc).
Manitowoc keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 1.1% compared with −21.2% at Columbus McKinnon.
Columbus McKinnon pays a dividend yielding 1.4%; Manitowoc does not pay one.
Columbus McKinnon scores higher on the StockData Score (7 against 5 for Manitowoc), 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 | CMCO | MTW |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $597M | $859M |
| Share price | $20.70 | $23.81 |
| Change, 1 year | 31.0% | 109% |
| Change, 5 years | −57.9% | 18.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.29 | 1.41 |
| Employees | 7,300 | 4,700 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 7 (better) | 5 |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Growth score | 1 | 1 |
| Performance score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Health score | 1 | 1 |
| Dividend score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 33.5× |
| P/S | 0.4× | 0.4× (better) |
| P/B | 0.4× (better) | 1.2× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 8.7× |
| P/FCF | – | 17.4× |
| FCF yield | −20.5% | 5.7% (better) |
| Fair value | $53.79 | $23.19 |
| Margin of safety | 61.5% (better) | −2.7% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 55.2% (better) | 10.2% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 12.9% (better) | 9.2% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | −54.0% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | −53.6% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 28.8% (better) | 19.1% |
| Operating margin | −9.6% | 3.6% (better) |
| Net margin | −21.2% | 1.1% (better) |
| FCF margin | −8.2% | 2.1% (better) |
| Return on equity | −27.8% | 3.8% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | −4.5% | 4.6% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.74 | 0.67 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 2.83 |
| Current ratio | 2.00 | 2.11 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 0.48 | 2.36 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.4% | – |
| Payout ratio | – | 0.00% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 3.1% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 1.4% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 88.9% | 83.9% |
| Held by insiders | 76.7% | 5.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $586K (better) | −$106K |
| Short interest, % of float | 36.7% | 5.1% |
Go deeper
- CMCO stock overview
- CMCO income statement
- CMCO valuation and score
- MTW stock overview
- MTW income statement
- MTW valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.