Griffon vs Masco
GFF and MAS side by side, both in fabricated metal products, except machinery and transportation equipment. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How GFF and MAS compare
Masco is the larger company, worth 3.5 times as much as Griffon ($15.9B against $4.6B).
On earnings, Masco is cheaper: it trades at 18.5× trailing earnings, against 25.8× for Griffon.
Griffon grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (26.9% versus −0.56% for Masco).
Masco keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 11.6% compared with 6.5% at Griffon.
Both pay dividends: Griffon yields 0.87% and Masco 1.6%.
Griffon scores higher on the StockData Score (17 against 15 for Masco), 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 | GFF | MAS |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $4.6B | $15.9B |
| Share price | $101.09 | $80.64 |
| Change, 1 year | 35.2% | 23.6% |
| Change, 5 years | 263% | 25.7% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.10 | 1.02 |
| Employees | 5,100 | 18K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 17 (better) | 15 |
| Valuation score | 1 | 1 |
| Growth score | 3 | 3 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 4 | 4 |
| Dividend score | 4 | 4 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 25.8× | 18.5× (better) |
| P/S | 1.7× (better) | 2.1× |
| P/B | 35.5× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 11.6× (better) | 12.7× |
| P/FCF | 15.4× | 14.1× (better) |
| PEG | – | 8.96 |
| FCF yield | 6.5% | 7.1% (better) |
| Fair value | $91.17 | $78.43 |
| Margin of safety | −10.9% | −2.8% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 26.9% (better) | −0.56% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.0% (better) | 1.0% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 156% (better) | 9.9% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 193% (better) | 15.7% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −1.7% (better) | −3.4% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 40.5% (better) | 37.0% |
| Operating margin | 16.7% | 17.5% (better) |
| Net margin | 6.5% | 11.6% (better) |
| FCF margin | 10.8% | 14.8% (better) |
| Return on equity | 185% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 20.4% | 42.2% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 9.81 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.35 | 1.81 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 5.2× | 13.0× (better) |
| Current ratio | 2.41 (better) | 1.86 |
| Altman Z-score | 4.21 (better) | 4.05 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 8 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.87% | 1.6% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 21.8% | 29.2% |
| Years of dividend growth | 13 (better) | 12 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 19.1% (better) | 17.9% |
| Buyback yield | 3.1% | 5.9% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 3.9% | 7.4% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 80.6% | 102% |
| Held by insiders | 6.9% | 0.33% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$36.6M | −$5.1M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 2 |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.4% | 4.2% |
Go deeper
- GFF stock overview
- GFF income statement
- GFF valuation and score
- MAS stock overview
- MAS income statement
- MAS valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.