Carpenter Technology vs Howmet Aerospace
CRS and HWM side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CRS and HWM compare
Howmet Aerospace is the larger company, worth 5.7 times as much as Carpenter Technology ($79.4B against $14.0B).
On earnings, Carpenter Technology is cheaper: it trades at 26.9× trailing earnings, against 39.0× for Howmet Aerospace.
Howmet Aerospace grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (22.0% versus 8.6% for Carpenter Technology).
Howmet Aerospace keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 21.1% compared with 17.0% at Carpenter Technology.
Both pay dividends: Carpenter Technology yields 0.21% and Howmet Aerospace 0.25%.
Carpenter Technology scores higher on the StockData Score (21 against 17 for Howmet Aerospace), 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 | CRS | HWM |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $14.0B | $79.4B |
| Share price | $283.08 | $199.22 |
| Change, 1 year | −12.5% | −2.1% |
| Change, 5 years | 764% | 496% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.37 | 1.15 |
| Employees | 4,500 | 730 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 21 (better) | 17 |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Performance score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 1 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 26.9× (better) | 39.0× |
| P/S | 4.5× (better) | 8.2× |
| P/B | 6.3× (better) | 13.8× |
| EV/EBITDA | 16.9× (better) | 27.3× |
| P/FCF | 38.7× (better) | 41.2× |
| PEG | 0.25 (better) | 0.79 |
| FCF yield | 2.6% (better) | 2.4% |
| Fair value | $301.35 | $147.92 |
| Margin of safety | 6.1% (better) | −34.7% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 8.6% | 22.0% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 16.2% (better) | 9.4% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 40.9% | 41.6% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 41.8% | 43.5% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 30.6% | 36.6% (better) |
| Operating margin | 22.5% | 28.1% (better) |
| Net margin | 17.0% | 21.1% (better) |
| FCF margin | 11.6% | 19.8% (better) |
| Return on equity | 25.8% | 37.7% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 23.7% | 25.7% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.31 (better) | 0.77 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.35 (better) | 1.29 |
| Interest coverage | 18.6× | – |
| Current ratio | 3.81 (better) | 1.86 |
| Altman Z-score | 7.90 | 8.52 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 9 (better) | 8 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.21% | 0.25% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 7.6% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 0.00% | 85.6% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 1.3% | 1.6% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 1.5% | 1.9% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 94.2% | 91.4% |
| Held by insiders | 2.6% | 1.0% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$94.6M | −$22.9M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.0% | 2.6% |
Go deeper
- CRS stock overview
- CRS income statement
- CRS valuation and score
- HWM stock overview
- HWM income statement
- HWM valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.