Core & Main vs Reliance
CNM and RS side by side, both in wholesale trade-durable goods. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CNM and RS compare
Reliance is the larger company, worth 2.6 times as much as Core & Main ($22.3B against $8.4B).
On earnings, Core & Main is cheaper: it trades at 18.3× trailing earnings, against 25.4× for Reliance.
Reliance grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (15.4% versus −0.54% for Core & Main).
Core & Main keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 6.0% compared with 5.7% at Reliance.
Reliance pays a dividend yielding 1.1%; Core & Main does not pay one.
Core & Main scores higher on the StockData Score (14 against 13 for Reliance), 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 | CNM | RS |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $8.4B | $22.3B |
| Share price | $44.25 | $436.91 |
| Change, 1 year | −16.7% | 54.8% |
| Change, 5 years | 63.2% | 168% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.22 | 0.80 |
| Employees | 5,600 | 16K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 14 (better) | 13 |
| Valuation score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 18.3× (better) | 25.4× |
| P/S | 1.1× (better) | 1.4× |
| P/B | 4.2× | 3.0× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 11.5× (better) | 15.7× |
| P/FCF | 13.4× (better) | 41.3× |
| PEG | 6.67 | – |
| FCF yield | 7.5% (better) | 2.4% |
| Fair value | $48.24 | $275.24 |
| Margin of safety | 8.3% (better) | −58.7% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −0.54% | 15.4% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 16.0% (better) | 10.2% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 6.5% | 21.1% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 8.5% | 25.5% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 19.8% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 27.0% | 28.2% (better) |
| Operating margin | 9.6% (better) | 7.8% |
| Net margin | 6.0% (better) | 5.7% |
| FCF margin | 8.2% (better) | 3.4% |
| Return on equity | 23.4% (better) | 12.2% |
| Return on invested capital | 13.7% (better) | 10.9% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.21 | 0.22 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.30 | 0.94 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 6.3× | 19.5× (better) |
| Current ratio | 2.47 | 4.30 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 3.09 | 6.69 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 1.1% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 15 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 13.9% |
| Buyback yield | 4.3% (better) | 2.2% |
| Shareholder yield | 4.3% (better) | 3.4% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 105% | 82.3% |
| Held by insiders | 2.7% | 0.43% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$67.6K (better) | −$16.0M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 6.7% | 2.5% |
Go deeper
- CNM stock overview
- CNM income statement
- CNM valuation and score
- RS stock overview
- RS income statement
- RS valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.