Envela vs Signet Jewelers
ELA and SIG side by side, both in miscellaneous retail. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How ELA and SIG compare
Signet Jewelers is the larger company, worth 16 times as much as Envela ($4.4B against $271M).
On earnings, Envela is cheaper: it trades at 12.1× trailing earnings, against 13.1× for Signet Jewelers.
Envela grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (47.7% versus 0.59% for Signet Jewelers).
Envela keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 7.6% compared with 5.2% at Signet Jewelers.
Signet Jewelers pays a dividend yielding 0.61%; Envela does not pay one.
Envela scores higher on the StockData Score (19 against 16 for Signet Jewelers), 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 | ELA | SIG |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $271M | $4.4B |
| Share price | $10.42 | $113.98 |
| Change, 1 year | −3.6% | 7.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 147% | 5.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.64 | 1.26 |
| Employees | 288 | 889 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 19 (better) | 16 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 2 |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Health score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 12.1× (better) | 13.1× |
| P/S | 0.9× | 0.6× (better) |
| P/B | 3.4× | 2.4× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 7.9× | 6.3× (better) |
| P/FCF | 11.3× | 8.1× (better) |
| PEG | – | 6.06 |
| FCF yield | 8.9% | 12.3% (better) |
| Fair value | $14.77 | $122.30 |
| Margin of safety | 29.4% (better) | 6.8% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 47.7% (better) | 0.59% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 16.2% (better) | 5.4% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 162% | 168% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 161% | 191% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 18.5% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 21.7% | 39.1% (better) |
| Operating margin | 9.6% (better) | 6.8% |
| Net margin | 7.6% (better) | 5.2% |
| FCF margin | 8.2% (better) | 7.9% |
| Return on equity | 32.4% (better) | 19.9% |
| Return on invested capital | 46.5% (better) | 26.0% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.12 (better) | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −1.13 | – |
| Interest coverage | 79.8× | – |
| Current ratio | 4.24 (better) | 1.64 |
| Altman Z-score | 10.62 (better) | 3.43 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 9 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 0.61% |
| Payout ratio | – | 15.0% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 5 |
| Buyback yield | – | 5.2% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 5.8% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 19.3% | 113% |
| Held by insiders | 0.01% | 2.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $2.8K (better) | −$863K |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.0% | 12.7% |
Go deeper
- ELA stock overview
- ELA income statement
- ELA valuation and score
- SIG stock overview
- SIG income statement
- SIG valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.