Fastenal vs MSC Industrial Direct
FAST and MSM side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How FAST and MSM compare
Fastenal is the larger company, worth 8.8 times as much as MSC Industrial Direct ($59.6B against $6.8B).
On earnings, MSC Industrial Direct is cheaper: it trades at 29.2× trailing earnings, against 44.0× for Fastenal.
Fastenal grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (12.5% versus 4.4% for MSC Industrial Direct).
Fastenal keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 15.5% compared with 5.9% at MSC Industrial Direct.
Both pay dividends: Fastenal yields 1.9% and MSC Industrial Direct 2.9%.
Fastenal scores higher on the StockData Score (15 against 11 for MSC Industrial Direct), 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 | FAST | MSM |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $59.6B | $6.8B |
| Share price | $51.91 | $121.02 |
| Change, 1 year | 26.3% | 43.7% |
| Change, 5 years | 78.3% | 42.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.79 | 0.78 |
| Employees | 24K | 7,284 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 15 (better) | 11 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividend score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 44.0× | 29.2× (better) |
| P/S | 6.8× | 1.7× (better) |
| P/B | 14.6× | 4.8× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 33.5× | 16.7× (better) |
| P/FCF | 51.5× | 30.7× (better) |
| PEG | 9.03 | – |
| FCF yield | 1.9% | 3.3% (better) |
| Fair value | $27.20 | $83.84 |
| Margin of safety | −90.8% | −44.3% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 12.5% (better) | 4.4% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 7.7% (better) | 3.4% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 13.7% | 16.5% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 13.5% | 16.9% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 7.9% (better) | −4.6% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 44.7% (better) | 40.8% |
| Operating margin | 20.3% (better) | 8.5% |
| Net margin | 15.5% (better) | 5.9% |
| FCF margin | 13.2% (better) | 5.6% |
| Return on equity | 34.3% (better) | 16.6% |
| Return on invested capital | 34.7% (better) | 13.6% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.03 (better) | 0.36 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.05 | 1.00 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 394× (better) | 15.0× |
| Current ratio | 4.18 (better) | 1.55 |
| Altman Z-score | 33.65 (better) | 6.24 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.9% | 2.9% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 78.1% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 1 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 4.6% | – |
| Buyback yield | – | 0.21% |
| Shareholder yield | 1.9% | 3.1% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 85.5% | 83.4% |
| Held by insiders | 0.11% | 12.5% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$4.8M | $6.8M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.0% | 5.0% |
Go deeper
- FAST stock overview
- FAST income statement
- FAST valuation and score
- MSM stock overview
- MSM income statement
- MSM valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.