Cooper-Standard vs Patrick Industries
CPS and PATK side by side, both in motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CPS and PATK compare
Patrick Industries is the larger company, worth 7.0 times as much as Cooper-Standard ($2.5B against $357M).
Cooper-Standard grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (27.9% versus 3.2% for Patrick Industries).
Patrick Industries keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 3.7% compared with −1.7% at Cooper-Standard.
Patrick Industries pays a dividend yielding 2.4%; Cooper-Standard does not pay one.
Patrick Industries scores higher on the StockData Score (11 against 5 for Cooper-Standard), 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 | CPS | PATK |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $357M | $2.5B |
| Share price | $20.07 | $77.68 |
| Change, 1 year | −48.0% | −21.4% |
| Change, 5 years | −7.9% | 45.7% |
| Beta (5Y) | 2.33 | 1.12 |
| Employees | 22K | 7,500 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 5 | 11 (better) |
| Valuation score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Health score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 18.4× |
| P/S | 0.1× (better) | 0.6× |
| P/B | – | 2.2× |
| EV/EBITDA | 13.5× | 8.9× (better) |
| P/FCF | – | 19.5× |
| FCF yield | −7.9% | 5.1% (better) |
| Fair value | – | $72.63 |
| Margin of safety | – | −7.0% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 27.9% (better) | 3.2% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | – | 9.7% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 16.8% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 14.4% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 6.9% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 12.0% | 23.1% (better) |
| Operating margin | 2.9% | 6.7% (better) |
| Net margin | −1.7% | 3.7% (better) |
| FCF margin | −0.81% | 3.2% (better) |
| Return on equity | – | 13.0% |
| Return on invested capital | 9.3% (better) | 8.3% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 1.25 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 10.06 | 3.19 (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.36 | 2.67 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.90 | 2.86 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 2.4% |
| Payout ratio | – | 40.4% |
| Buyback yield | – | 4.3% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 6.7% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 64.9% | 112% |
| Held by insiders | 5.5% | 4.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $295K (better) | −$1.9M |
| Short interest, % of float | 4.1% | 19.0% |
Go deeper
- CPS stock overview
- CPS income statement
- CPS valuation and score
- PATK stock overview
- PATK income statement
- PATK valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.