Dauch vs Lear
DCH and LEA 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 DCH and LEA compare
Lear is the larger company, worth 5.1 times as much as Dauch ($5.8B against $1.1B).
Dauch grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (41.0% versus 3.5% for Lear).
Lear keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 2.5% compared with −2.0% at Dauch.
Lear pays a dividend yielding 2.6%; Dauch does not pay one.
Lear scores higher on the StockData Score (22 against 7 for Dauch), 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 | DCH | LEA |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $1.1B | $5.8B |
| Share price | $4.78 | $118.44 |
| Change, 1 year | −28.0% | 13.8% |
| Change, 5 years | −51.3% | −33.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.69 | 0.92 |
| Employees | 18K | 75K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 7 | 22 (better) |
| Valuation score | 3 | 6 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Performance score | 0 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 10.3× |
| P/S | 0.1× (better) | 0.2× |
| P/B | 0.8× (better) | 1.2× |
| EV/EBITDA | 7.6× | 5.3× (better) |
| P/FCF | – | 8.3× |
| PEG | – | 0.73 |
| FCF yield | −2.2% | 12.0% (better) |
| Fair value | $7.01 | $170.97 |
| Margin of safety | 31.8% (better) | 30.7% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 41.0% (better) | 3.5% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.4% | 6.4% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −487% | 32.2% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −406% | 40.0% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 25.5% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 10.9% (better) | 6.9% |
| Operating margin | 0.98% | 3.7% (better) |
| Net margin | −2.0% | 2.5% (better) |
| FCF margin | −0.30% | 2.9% (better) |
| Return on equity | −15.2% | 11.6% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 1.5% | 10.2% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 3.39 | 0.55 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 5.96 | 1.25 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 0.3× | 9.1× (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.40 (better) | 1.18 |
| Altman Z-score | 0.91 | 2.79 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 2.6% |
| Payout ratio | – | 27.1% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 0 |
| Buyback yield | 0.73% | 9.0% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 0.73% | 11.6% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 101% | 108% |
| Held by insiders | 4.4% | 0.42% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $182K (better) | −$15.5M |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 8.2% | 6.0% |
Go deeper
- DCH stock overview
- DCH income statement
- DCH valuation and score
- LEA stock overview
- LEA income statement
- LEA valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.