Dorman Products vs Motorcar Parts of America
DORM and MPAA 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 DORM and MPAA compare
Dorman Products is the larger company, worth 21 times as much as Motorcar Parts of America ($4.0B against $195M).
Dorman Products grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (3.3% versus −0.82% for Motorcar Parts of America).
Dorman Products keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 10.2% compared with −0.53% at Motorcar Parts of America.
Dorman Products scores higher on the StockData Score (14 against 11 for Motorcar Parts of America), 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 | DORM | MPAA |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $4.0B | $195M |
| Share price | $136.01 | $10.31 |
| Change, 1 year | 1.9% | −39.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 19.1% | −47.9% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.71 | 1.13 |
| Employees | 300 | 5,600 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 14 (better) | 11 |
| Valuation score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 2 |
| Health score | 5 | 5 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 18.8× | – |
| P/S | 1.9× | 0.3× (better) |
| P/B | 2.7× | 0.8× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 11.8× | 3.5× (better) |
| P/FCF | 18.8× | – |
| PEG | 0.95 | – |
| FCF yield | 5.3% (better) | −3.2% |
| Fair value | $116.92 | $16.51 |
| Margin of safety | −16.3% | 37.6% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 3.3% (better) | −0.82% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 14.3% (better) | 7.9% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −3.0% (better) | −346% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −1.8% (better) | −429% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 15.0% (better) | −11.0% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 42.3% (better) | 19.9% |
| Operating margin | 14.5% (better) | 6.4% |
| Net margin | 10.2% (better) | −0.53% |
| FCF margin | 9.9% (better) | −0.80% |
| Return on equity | 15.0% (better) | −1.6% |
| Return on invested capital | 12.7% (better) | 10.3% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.29 (better) | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.84 | – |
| Interest coverage | 11.9× | – |
| Current ratio | 3.60 (better) | 1.44 |
| Altman Z-score | 5.04 (better) | 1.31 |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 7 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Buyback yield | – | 5.8% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 5.8% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 97.0% | 84.2% |
| Held by insiders | 8.2% | 13.2% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$1.7M | −$202K (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 5.8% | 5.2% |
Go deeper
- DORM stock overview
- DORM income statement
- DORM valuation and score
- MPAA stock overview
- MPAA income statement
- MPAA valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.