Ennis vs Lee Enterprises
EBF and LEE side by side, both in printing, publishing, and allied industries. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How EBF and LEE compare
Ennis is the larger company, worth 3.5 times as much as Lee Enterprises ($534M against $154M).
Ennis grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (2.3% versus −11.1% for Lee Enterprises).
Ennis keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 9.8% compared with −1.8% at Lee Enterprises.
Ennis pays a dividend yielding 4.8%; Lee Enterprises does not pay one.
Ennis scores higher on the StockData Score (20 against 3 for Lee Enterprises), 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 | EBF | LEE |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $534M | $154M |
| Share price | $21.08 | $6.89 |
| Change, 1 year | 23.9% | 69.1% |
| Change, 5 years | 8.8% | −62.7% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.41 | 0.65 |
| Employees | 1,835 | 2,500 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 20 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 1 |
| Dividend score | 5 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 13.8× | – |
| P/S | 1.3× | 0.3× (better) |
| P/B | 1.7× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 8.9× (better) | 15.7× |
| P/FCF | 9.3× | – |
| FCF yield | 10.8% (better) | −0.38% |
| Fair value | $23.83 | – |
| Margin of safety | 11.5% | – |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 2.3% (better) | −11.1% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 1.9% (better) | −1.9% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −7.7% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −6.1% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 12.3% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 30.6% | – |
| Operating margin | 13.6% (better) | 4.0% |
| Net margin | 9.8% (better) | −1.8% |
| FCF margin | 14.5% (better) | −0.11% |
| Return on equity | 12.6% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 14.7% (better) | 4.2% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 11.24 |
| Interest coverage | – | 0.6× |
| Current ratio | 3.79 (better) | 1.17 |
| Altman Z-score | 9.02 (better) | 0.37 |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 2 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 4.8% | – |
| Payout ratio | 65.7% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 2.1% | – |
| Buyback yield | 1.1% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 5.9% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 85.4% | 20.3% |
| Held by insiders | 1.2% | – |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $0 | $13.2M (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 7.4% | – |
Go deeper
- EBF stock overview
- EBF income statement
- EBF valuation and score
- LEE stock overview
- LEE income statement
- LEE valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.