Fuller H B vs WD 40
FUL and WDFC side by side, both in chemicals and allied products. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How FUL and WDFC compare
Fuller H B and WD 40 are about the same size, with market caps of $2.7B and $3.0B.
On earnings, Fuller H B is cheaper: it trades at 13.7× trailing earnings, against 36.7× for WD 40.
WD 40 grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (11.0% versus 1.5% for Fuller H B).
WD 40 keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 12.0% compared with 5.6% at Fuller H B.
Both pay dividends: Fuller H B yields 2.0% and WD 40 1.8%.
WD 40 scores higher on the StockData Score (19 against 18 for Fuller H B), 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 | FUL | WDFC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $2.7B | $3.0B |
| Share price | $49.29 | $223.40 |
| Change, 1 year | −14.8% | 11.2% |
| Change, 5 years | −35.6% | −3.0% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.95 | 0.53 |
| Employees | 7,100 | 522 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 18 | 19 (better) |
| Valuation score | 6 (better) | 2 |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 2 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 4 | 4 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 13.7× (better) | 36.7× |
| P/S | 0.7× (better) | 4.3× |
| P/B | 1.2× (better) | 11.0× |
| EV/EBITDA | 7.9× (better) | 25.2× |
| P/FCF | 26.5× (better) | 30.7× |
| PEG | – | 4.61 |
| FCF yield | 3.8% (better) | 3.3% |
| Fair value | $102.06 | $186.85 |
| Margin of safety | 51.7% (better) | −19.6% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 1.5% | 11.0% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.5% | 7.1% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 72.2% (better) | −9.5% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 71.8% (better) | −9.1% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 3.1% | 3.6% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 32.3% | 55.3% (better) |
| Operating margin | – | 15.8% |
| Net margin | 5.6% | 12.0% (better) |
| FCF margin | 2.8% | 14.2% (better) |
| Return on equity | 9.6% | 30.4% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | – | 28.8% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.95 | 0.32 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.35 | 0.13 (better) |
| Interest coverage | – | 39.3× |
| Current ratio | 1.82 | 2.57 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.85 | 12.28 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 | 7 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.0% (better) | 1.8% |
| Payout ratio | 26.2% | 65.6% |
| Years of dividend growth | 16 | 16 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 7.4% | 7.5% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 1.8% (better) | 0.99% |
| Shareholder yield | 3.8% (better) | 2.8% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 104% | 87.8% |
| Held by insiders | 0.65% | 0.98% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $853K (better) | −$12.3K |
| Short interest, % of float | 4.1% | 3.6% |
Go deeper
- FUL stock overview
- FUL income statement
- FUL valuation and score
- WDFC stock overview
- WDFC income statement
- WDFC valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.