Fortune Brands Innovations vs Louisiana-Pacific
FBIN and LPX side by side, both in materials. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How FBIN and LPX compare
Fortune Brands Innovations and Louisiana-Pacific are about the same size, with market caps of $5.9B and $5.3B.
Fortune Brands Innovations grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (−3.0% versus −14.3% for Louisiana-Pacific).
Both pay dividends: Fortune Brands Innovations yields 2.1% and Louisiana-Pacific 1.6%.
Louisiana-Pacific scores higher on the StockData Score (8 against 6 for Fortune Brands Innovations), 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 | FBIN | LPX |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $5.9B | $5.3B |
| Share price | $49.17 | $76.01 |
| Change, 1 year | 0.99% | −1.1% |
| Change, 5 years | −54.2% | 8.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.27 | 1.24 |
| Employees | 10K | 4,300 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 6 | 8 (better) |
| Valuation score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 1 | 1 |
| Performance score | 0 | 0 |
| Health score | 2 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 2 | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 96.2× |
| P/S | 1.3× (better) | 2.2× |
| P/B | – | 3.0× |
| EV/EBITDA | 34.0× | 24.0× (better) |
| P/FCF | 10.6× | – |
| FCF yield | 9.4% (better) | −0.40% |
| Fair value | $23.70 | $35.25 |
| Margin of safety | −107% (better) | −116% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −3.0% (better) | −14.3% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.3% (better) | 2.5% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | −81.8% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | −81.5% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −8.9% (better) | −14.1% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 46.0% (better) | 18.0% |
| Operating margin | 5.4% (better) | 3.0% |
| Net margin | – | 2.2% |
| FCF margin | 12.7% (better) | −0.85% |
| Return on equity | – | 3.1% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 2.9% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 0.20 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 8.85 | 0.53 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 2.2× | 4.1× (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.83 | 3.22 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.64 | 5.86 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | – | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.1% (better) | 1.6% |
| Payout ratio | – | 150% |
| Years of dividend growth | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 0.60% | 14.1% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 1.6% (better) | 0.00% |
| Shareholder yield | 3.7% (better) | 1.6% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 106% | 106% |
| Held by insiders | 8.9% | 1.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $30.6M (better) | −$13.6M |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 | 2 |
| Short interest, % of float | 7.4% | 12.6% |
Go deeper
- FBIN stock overview
- FBIN income statement
- FBIN valuation and score
- LPX stock overview
- LPX income statement
- LPX valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.