Flex vs Sanmina
FLEX and SANM side by side, both in electronic components and accessories. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How FLEX and SANM compare
Flex is the larger company, worth 3.6 times as much as Sanmina ($31.9B against $8.9B).
On earnings, Sanmina is cheaper: it trades at 29.6× trailing earnings, against 31.2× for Flex.
Sanmina grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (58.6% versus 17.5% for Flex).
Flex scores higher on the StockData Score (11 against 10 for Sanmina), 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 | FLEX | SANM |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $31.9B | $8.9B |
| Share price | $86.48 | $165.57 |
| Change, 1 year | 30.8% | 19.9% |
| Change, 5 years | 375% | 283% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.55 | 1.24 |
| Employees | 150K | 39K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 11 (better) | 10 |
| Valuation score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Growth score | 4 | 4 |
| Performance score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 31.2× | 29.6× (better) |
| P/S | 1.0× | 0.7× (better) |
| P/B | 5.5× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 21.7× | 13.2× (better) |
| P/FCF | 40.8× | 14.9× (better) |
| PEG | 2.93 (better) | 5.49 |
| FCF yield | 2.5% | 6.7% (better) |
| Fair value | $61.32 | $164.35 |
| Margin of safety | −41.0% | −0.74% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 17.5% | 58.6% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 3.0% | 3.2% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 18.9% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 22.6% (better) | 19.7% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 14.0% | 18.9% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 9.5% (better) | 9.0% |
| Operating margin | 5.1% (better) | 4.2% |
| Net margin | – | 2.4% |
| FCF margin | 2.5% | 4.7% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 17.2% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.90 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.36 | 0.47 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 6.5× (better) | 5.6× |
| Current ratio | 1.34 | 1.78 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.57 | 2.68 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 | 8 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Buyback yield | 1.3% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 1.3% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 94.4% | 93.8% |
| Held by insiders | 0.77% | 3.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$118M | −$42.9M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.4% | 3.3% |
Go deeper
- FLEX stock overview
- FLEX income statement
- FLEX valuation and score
- SANM stock overview
- SANM income statement
- SANM valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.