Everus Construction vs M/I Homes
ECG and MHO side by side, both in operative builders. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How ECG and MHO compare
Everus Construction is the larger company, worth 1.4 times as much as M/I Homes ($4.4B against $3.2B).
On earnings, M/I Homes is cheaper: it trades at 12.1× trailing earnings, against 15.1× for Everus Construction.
Everus Construction grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (33.5% versus −6.0% for M/I Homes).
M/I Homes keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 6.6% compared with 6.2% at Everus Construction.
Everus Construction scores higher on the StockData Score (17 against 11 for M/I Homes), 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 | ECG | MHO |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $4.4B | $3.2B |
| Share price | $85.25 | $126.96 |
| Change, 1 year | −14.4% | −1.6% |
| Change, 5 years | – | 111% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.90 | 1.16 |
| Employees | 10K | 1,801 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 17 (better) | 11 |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Growth score | 5 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 15.1× | 12.1× (better) |
| P/S | 0.9× | 0.8× (better) |
| P/B | 5.0× | 1.0× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 12.2× | 7.4× (better) |
| P/FCF | 18.3× (better) | 23.2× |
| PEG | 0.87 | – |
| FCF yield | 5.5% (better) | 4.3% |
| Fair value | $88.29 | $110.04 |
| Margin of safety | 3.4% (better) | −15.4% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 33.5% (better) | −6.0% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | – | 7.7% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 59.9% (better) | −41.3% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 60.1% (better) | −38.3% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 12.4% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 13.6% | 20.7% (better) |
| Operating margin | 8.2% | 8.2% (better) |
| Net margin | 6.2% | 6.6% (better) |
| FCF margin | 5.1% (better) | 3.3% |
| Return on equity | 40.3% (better) | 8.7% |
| Return on invested capital | 30.0% (better) | 10.8% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.66 (better) | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.79 | – |
| Interest coverage | 18.7× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.53 | – |
| Altman Z-score | 4.25 (better) | 3.29 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Buyback yield | – | 6.4% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 6.4% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 85.0% | 98.8% |
| Held by insiders | 0.57% | 3.5% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$283K (better) | −$25.3M |
| Short interest, % of float | 4.1% | 6.3% |
Go deeper
- ECG stock overview
- ECG income statement
- ECG valuation and score
- MHO stock overview
- MHO income statement
- MHO valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.