Energy Services of America vs Preformed Line Products
ESOA and PLPC side by side, both in heavy construction other than building construction contractors. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How ESOA and PLPC compare
Preformed Line Products is the larger company, worth 8.7 times as much as Energy Services of America ($1.5B against $169M).
Energy Services of America grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (21.2% versus 16.3% for Preformed Line Products).
Both pay dividends: Energy Services of America yields 1.5% and Preformed Line Products 0.28%.
Preformed Line Products scores higher on the StockData Score (18 against 14 for Energy Services 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 | ESOA | PLPC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $169M | $1.5B |
| Share price | $9.08 | $301.00 |
| Change, 1 year | −16.8% | 40.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 468% | 348% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.48 | 0.81 |
| Employees | 1,418 | 3,734 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 14 | 18 (better) |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 25.3× |
| P/S | 0.4× (better) | 1.9× |
| P/B | 2.0× (better) | 2.9× |
| EV/EBITDA | 11.1× (better) | 13.8× |
| P/FCF | 31.4× (better) | 40.5× |
| FCF yield | 3.2% (better) | 2.5% |
| Fair value | $10.11 | $227.89 |
| Margin of safety | 10.1% (better) | −32.1% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 21.2% (better) | 16.3% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 28.1% (better) | 7.5% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 56.8% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 57.7% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −30.5% | 3.6% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 11.8% | 32.4% (better) |
| Operating margin | 3.9% | 10.1% (better) |
| Net margin | – | 7.6% |
| FCF margin | 1.2% | 4.7% (better) |
| Return on equity | – | 12.0% |
| Return on invested capital | 12.1% | 12.7% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.54 | 0.10 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.69 (better) | −0.44 |
| Interest coverage | 5.7× | 52.3× (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.50 | 2.85 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 3.43 | 6.86 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | – | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.5% (better) | 0.28% |
| Payout ratio | – | 7.1% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 1 |
| Buyback yield | 0.50% (better) | −0.02% |
| Shareholder yield | 2.0% (better) | 0.26% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 50.1% | 70.0% |
| Held by insiders | 19.2% | 29.2% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$4.4M | −$3.0M (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.2% | 4.3% |
Go deeper
- ESOA stock overview
- ESOA income statement
- ESOA valuation and score
- PLPC stock overview
- PLPC income statement
- PLPC valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.