Foster L B vs Ryerson
FSTR and RYZ side by side, both in wholesale trade-durable goods. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How FSTR and RYZ compare
Ryerson is the larger company, worth 3.5 times as much as Foster L B ($1.6B against $445M).
Ryerson grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (53.2% versus 15.8% for Foster L B).
Foster L B keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 2.3% compared with 0.21% at Ryerson.
Ryerson pays a dividend yielding 1.9%; Foster L B does not pay one.
Foster L B scores higher on the StockData Score (10 against 8 for Ryerson), 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 | FSTR | RYZ |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $445M | $1.6B |
| Share price | $42.31 | $30.46 |
| Change, 1 year | 50.6% | 48.9% |
| Change, 5 years | 152% | 15.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.94 | 1.37 |
| Employees | 1,191 | 850 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 10 (better) | 8 |
| Valuation score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 32.8× | – |
| P/S | 0.8× | 0.2× (better) |
| P/B | 2.4× | 1.2× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 12.4× | 8.8× (better) |
| P/FCF | 10.7× | – |
| FCF yield | 9.3% (better) | −11.5% |
| Fair value | $36.11 | $30.98 |
| Margin of safety | −17.2% | 1.7% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 15.8% | 53.2% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 1.7% | 5.7% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 182% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 187% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −0.57% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 20.9% (better) | 17.3% |
| Operating margin | 4.4% (better) | 1.0% |
| Net margin | 2.3% (better) | 0.21% |
| FCF margin | 7.1% (better) | −2.7% |
| Return on equity | 7.6% (better) | 1.3% |
| Return on invested capital | 7.2% (better) | 4.7% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.15 | 0.00 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.57 (better) | −0.22 |
| Current ratio | 1.89 | 2.16 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 5.15 (better) | 2.76 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 1.9% |
| Payout ratio | – | 250% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 0 |
| Buyback yield | 1.7% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 1.7% | 1.9% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 79.0% | 94.9% |
| Held by insiders | 21.4% | 6.3% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$6.6M | −$3.2M (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.7% | 3.7% |
Go deeper
- FSTR stock overview
- FSTR income statement
- FSTR valuation and score
- RYZ stock overview
- RYZ income statement
- RYZ valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.