Fastenal vs Tractor Supply
FAST and TSCO side by side, both in consumer discretionary. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How FAST and TSCO compare
Fastenal is the larger company, worth 3.4 times as much as Tractor Supply ($59.6B against $17.7B).
Fastenal grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (12.5% versus 4.0% for Tractor Supply).
Fastenal keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 15.5% compared with 11.9% at Tractor Supply.
Both pay dividends: Fastenal yields 1.9% and Tractor Supply 2.8%.
Tractor Supply scores higher on the StockData Score (19 against 15 for Fastenal), 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 | TSCO |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $59.6B | $17.7B |
| Share price | $51.91 | $33.94 |
| Change, 1 year | 26.3% | −37.4% |
| Change, 5 years | 78.3% | −22.9% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.79 | 0.70 |
| Employees | 24K | 52K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 15 | 19 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Performance score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Dividend score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 44.0× | – |
| P/S | 6.8× | 1.1× (better) |
| P/B | 14.6× | 6.7× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 33.5× | 10.6× (better) |
| P/FCF | 51.5× (better) | 57.6× |
| PEG | 9.03 | – |
| FCF yield | 1.9% (better) | 1.7% |
| Fair value | $27.20 | $35.05 |
| Margin of safety | −90.8% | 3.2% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 12.5% (better) | 4.0% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 7.7% | 7.9% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 13.7% | 73.0% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 13.5% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 7.9% | 10.1% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 44.7% (better) | 36.5% |
| Operating margin | 20.3% (better) | 8.5% |
| Net margin | 15.5% (better) | 11.9% |
| FCF margin | 13.2% (better) | 1.9% |
| Return on equity | 34.3% | 73.4% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 34.7% (better) | 25.1% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.03 (better) | 0.82 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.05 | 1.04 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 394× (better) | 19.8× |
| Current ratio | 4.18 (better) | 1.33 |
| Altman Z-score | 33.65 (better) | 3.77 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.9% | 2.8% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 78.1% | 26.3% |
| Years of dividend growth | 1 | 16 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 4.6% | 25.1% (better) |
| Buyback yield | – | 2.5% |
| Shareholder yield | 1.9% | 5.3% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 85.5% | 94.7% |
| Held by insiders | 0.11% | 0.32% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$4.8M (better) | −$11.3M |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.0% | 8.3% |
Go deeper
- FAST stock overview
- FAST income statement
- FAST valuation and score
- TSCO stock overview
- TSCO income statement
- TSCO valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.