CSW Industrials vs Perimeter
CSW and PRM side by side, both in chemicals and allied products. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CSW and PRM compare
CSW Industrials and Perimeter are about the same size, with market caps of $4.6B and $4.8B.
On earnings, CSW Industrials is cheaper: it trades at 36.4× trailing earnings, against 163× for Perimeter.
Perimeter grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (30.7% versus 30.0% for CSW Industrials).
CSW Industrials keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 10.2% compared with 6.7% at Perimeter.
CSW Industrials pays a dividend yielding 0.31%; Perimeter does not pay one.
CSW Industrials scores higher on the StockData Score (10 against 7 for Perimeter), 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 | CSW | PRM |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $4.6B | $4.8B |
| Share price | $283.04 | $29.36 |
| Change, 1 year | 15.5% | 11.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 105% | 128% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.01 | 1.22 |
| Employees | 2,700 | 356 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 10 (better) | 7 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Health score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 36.4× (better) | 163× |
| P/S | 3.7× (better) | 5.8× |
| P/B | – | 3.6× |
| EV/EBITDA | 25.2× (better) | 26.0× |
| P/FCF | 26.0× (better) | 89.1× |
| PEG | 13.89 | – |
| FCF yield | 3.8% (better) | 1.1% |
| Fair value | $208.91 | $9.12 |
| Margin of safety | −35.5% (better) | −222% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 30.0% | 30.7% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 20.9% (better) | 14.0% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −11.2% (better) | −28.8% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −8.7% (better) | −64.0% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 20.4% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 42.1% | 54.5% (better) |
| Operating margin | 16.9% (better) | 14.5% |
| Net margin | 10.2% (better) | 6.7% |
| FCF margin | 14.2% (better) | 6.5% |
| Return on equity | – | 4.6% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 6.3% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 0.91 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.43 (better) | 4.82 |
| Interest coverage | – | 1.6× |
| Current ratio | 2.35 | 2.79 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 3.88 (better) | 1.64 |
| Piotroski F-score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.31% | – |
| Payout ratio | 14.7% | – |
| Buyback yield | 3.2% (better) | 0.00% |
| Shareholder yield | 3.5% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 101% | 85.6% |
| Held by insiders | 1.4% | 22.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$8.7M (better) | −$435M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 2 |
| Short interest, % of float | 6.3% | 5.2% |
Go deeper
- CSW stock overview
- CSW income statement
- CSW valuation and score
- PRM stock overview
- PRM income statement
- PRM valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.