Floor & Decor vs Lowes Companies
FND and LOW side by side, both in consumer discretionary. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How FND and LOW compare
Lowes Companies is the larger company, worth 23 times as much as Floor & Decor ($117B against $5.1B).
On earnings, Lowes Companies is cheaper: it trades at 17.7× trailing earnings, against 22.1× for Floor & Decor.
Lowes Companies grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (8.2% versus 2.4% for Floor & Decor).
Lowes Companies keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 7.3% compared with 4.9% at Floor & Decor.
Lowes Companies pays a dividend yielding 1.7%; Floor & Decor does not pay one.
Lowes Companies scores higher on the StockData Score (14 against 13 for Floor & Decor), 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 | FND | LOW |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $5.1B | $117B |
| Share price | $47.59 | $209.07 |
| Change, 1 year | −31.1% | −12.3% |
| Change, 5 years | −64.3% | −11.2% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.53 | 0.93 |
| Employees | 14K | 167K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 13 | 14 (better) |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 22.1× | 17.7× (better) |
| P/S | 1.1× (better) | 1.3× |
| P/B | 2.0× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 9.0× (better) | 12.0× |
| P/FCF | 24.0× | 16.8× (better) |
| PEG | – | 3.38 |
| FCF yield | 4.2% | 6.0% (better) |
| Fair value | $64.99 | $197.34 |
| Margin of safety | 26.8% (better) | −5.9% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 2.4% | 8.2% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 14.1% (better) | −0.75% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 9.9% (better) | −3.1% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 10.3% (better) | −2.8% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 0.85% | 8.9% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 44.9% (better) | 33.1% |
| Operating margin | 6.4% | 11.4% (better) |
| Net margin | 4.9% | 7.3% (better) |
| FCF margin | 4.5% | 7.7% (better) |
| Return on equity | 9.7% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 9.9% | 34.8% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.08 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.23 | 2.71 (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.33 (better) | 1.10 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.50 | 3.18 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 1.7% |
| Payout ratio | – | 40.5% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 17 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 15.6% |
| Buyback yield | – | 0.40% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 2.1% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 119% | 79.0% |
| Held by insiders | 1.2% | 0.11% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$13.7M | −$12.9M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 13.2% | 1.9% |
Go deeper
- FND stock overview
- FND income statement
- FND valuation and score
- LOW stock overview
- LOW income statement
- LOW valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.