Dolby Laboratories vs Vornado Realty Trust
DLB and VNO side by side, both in miscellaneous investing. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How DLB and VNO compare
Dolby Laboratories and Vornado Realty Trust are about the same size, with market caps of $6.1B and $6.5B.
On earnings, Dolby Laboratories is cheaper: it trades at 27.5× trailing earnings, against 1736× for Vornado Realty Trust.
Vornado Realty Trust grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (1.4% versus 0.55% for Dolby Laboratories).
Dolby Laboratories keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 16.7% compared with 3.7% at Vornado Realty Trust.
Both pay dividends: Dolby Laboratories yields 2.2% and Vornado Realty Trust 2.1%.
Dolby Laboratories scores higher on the StockData Score (18 against 8 for Vornado Realty Trust), 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 | DLB | VNO |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $6.1B | $6.5B |
| Share price | $64.59 | $34.71 |
| Change, 1 year | −1.8% | −4.4% |
| Change, 5 years | −27.9% | −21.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.75 | 1.29 |
| Employees | 2,051 | 3,145 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 18 (better) | 8 |
| Valuation score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 1 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 27.5× (better) | 1736× |
| P/S | 4.5× | 3.5× (better) |
| P/B | 2.3× | 1.1× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 16.2× | 10.3× (better) |
| P/FCF | 15.4× | – |
| PEG | 2.09 | – |
| FCF yield | 6.5% | – |
| Fair value | $60.87 | $35.32 |
| Margin of safety | −6.1% | 1.7% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 0.55% | 1.4% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 3.0% | 3.5% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −14.4% (better) | −92.2% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −13.6% (better) | −99.5% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 3.1% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 87.6% | – |
| Operating margin | 17.7% | – |
| Net margin | 16.7% (better) | 3.7% |
| FCF margin | 29.0% | – |
| Return on equity | 8.7% (better) | 1.1% |
| Return on invested capital | 10.5% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Current ratio | 3.19 | – |
| Altman Z-score | 8.62 (better) | 0.23 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.2% (better) | 2.1% |
| Payout ratio | 59.4% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 8.4% (better) | −20.8% |
| Buyback yield | 3.9% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 6.1% (better) | 2.1% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 66.1% | 99.5% |
| Held by insiders | 37.9% | 8.9% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$11.4M | −$2.2M (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 10.3% | – |
Go deeper
- DLB stock overview
- DLB income statement
- DLB valuation and score
- VNO stock overview
- VNO income statement
- VNO valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.