Cintas vs UniFirst
CTAS and UNF side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CTAS and UNF compare
Cintas is the larger company, worth 19 times as much as UniFirst ($88.0B against $4.6B).
On earnings, UniFirst is cheaper: it trades at 40.2× trailing earnings, against 43.4× for Cintas.
Cintas grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (9.5% versus 1.4% for UniFirst).
Cintas keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 17.8% compared with 4.6% at UniFirst.
Both pay dividends: Cintas yields 0.85% and UniFirst 0.57%.
Cintas scores higher on the StockData Score (19 against 13 for UniFirst), 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 | CTAS | UNF |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $88.0B | $4.6B |
| Share price | $219.82 | $254.84 |
| Change, 1 year | 19.5% | 63.8% |
| Change, 5 years | 99.0% | 22.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.90 | 0.59 |
| Employees | 48K | 16K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 19 (better) | 13 |
| Valuation score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 2 |
| Health score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 43.4× | 40.2× (better) |
| P/S | 7.6× | 1.8× (better) |
| P/B | 16.9× | 2.1× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 28.0× | 15.5× (better) |
| P/FCF | 43.3× (better) | 52.2× |
| PEG | 2.94 (better) | 2.98 |
| FCF yield | 2.3% (better) | 1.9% |
| Fair value | $148.64 | $157.93 |
| Margin of safety | −47.9% (better) | −61.4% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 9.5% (better) | 1.4% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.6% (better) | 6.2% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 11.3% (better) | −23.8% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 12.4% (better) | −22.1% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 13.9% (better) | 2.3% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 51.0% (better) | 36.7% |
| Operating margin | 23.4% (better) | 5.8% |
| Net margin | 17.8% (better) | 4.6% |
| FCF margin | 17.6% (better) | 3.5% |
| Return on equity | 41.4% (better) | 5.3% |
| Return on invested capital | 29.7% (better) | 5.6% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.47 (better) | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.68 | – |
| Interest coverage | 25.3× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.45 | 3.11 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 13.51 (better) | 6.80 |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.85% (better) | 0.57% |
| Payout ratio | 35.2% | 21.6% |
| Years of dividend growth | 4 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 7.5% | – |
| Buyback yield | 1.1% | 1.7% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 2.0% | 2.3% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 68.2% | 81.3% |
| Held by insiders | 14.4% | 54.1% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$3.6M | −$576K (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.7% | 11.4% |
Go deeper
- CTAS stock overview
- CTAS income statement
- CTAS valuation and score
- UNF stock overview
- UNF income statement
- UNF valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.