PC Connection vs Ingram Micro
CNXN and INGM 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 CNXN and INGM compare
Ingram Micro is the larger company, worth 3.1 times as much as PC Connection ($6.5B against $2.1B).
On earnings, Ingram Micro is cheaper: it trades at 14.4× trailing earnings, against 20.5× for PC Connection.
Ingram Micro grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (14.8% 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 0.79% at Ingram Micro.
Both pay dividends: PC Connection yields 0.96% and Ingram Micro 0.89%.
PC Connection scores higher on the StockData Score (15 against 12 for Ingram Micro), 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 | CNXN | INGM |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $2.1B | $6.5B |
| Share price | $82.91 | $28.42 |
| Change, 1 year | 40.3% | 33.6% |
| Change, 5 years | 75.1% | – |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.77 | 1.26 |
| Employees | 2,525 | 22K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 15 (better) | 12 |
| Valuation score | 1 | 5 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 1 |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 20.5× | 14.4× (better) |
| P/S | 0.7× | 0.1× (better) |
| P/B | 2.1× | 1.5× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 12.7× | 7.5× (better) |
| P/FCF | – | 42.3× |
| FCF yield | −0.98% | 2.4% (better) |
| Fair value | $74.38 | $41.33 |
| Margin of safety | −11.5% | 31.2% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 9.5% | 14.8% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 2.1% | – |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 22.5% | 59.6% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 25.4% | 61.0% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 9.1% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 18.6% (better) | 6.6% |
| Operating margin | 4.1% (better) | 1.8% |
| Net margin | 3.3% (better) | 0.79% |
| FCF margin | −0.65% | 0.26% (better) |
| Return on equity | 10.9% | 10.9% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 16.4% (better) | 9.7% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.89 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 2.29 |
| Interest coverage | – | 3.6× |
| Current ratio | 2.72 (better) | 1.31 |
| Altman Z-score | 6.30 (better) | 3.26 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.96% (better) | 0.89% |
| Payout ratio | 18.4% | 17.4% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 0 |
| Buyback yield | 0.63% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 1.6% (better) | 0.89% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 41.3% | 103% |
| Held by insiders | 100% | 78.3% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$19.1M (better) | −$1.5B |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 12.4% |
Go deeper
- CNXN stock overview
- CNXN income statement
- CNXN valuation and score
- INGM stock overview
- INGM income statement
- INGM valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.