Graham vs Stride
GHC and LRN side by side, both in services-educational services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How GHC and LRN compare
Graham is the larger company, worth 1.6 times as much as Stride ($5.2B against $3.2B).
On earnings, Stride is cheaper: it trades at 10.5× trailing earnings, against 10.9× for Graham.
Graham grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (4.3% versus 2.5% for Stride).
Stride keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 13.2% compared with 9.7% at Graham.
Graham pays a dividend yielding 0.60%; Stride does not pay one.
Stride scores higher on the StockData Score (20 against 17 for Graham), 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 | GHC | LRN |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $5.2B | $3.2B |
| Share price | $1244.05 | $75.82 |
| Change, 1 year | 15.2% | 15.6% |
| Change, 5 years | 109% | 104% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.68 | 0.37 |
| Employees | 20K | 9,200 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 17 | 20 (better) |
| Valuation score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 3 | 6 (better) |
| Health score | 5 | 5 |
| Dividend score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 10.9× | 10.5× (better) |
| P/S | 1.0× (better) | 1.3× |
| P/B | 1.1× (better) | 1.9× |
| EV/EBITDA | 21.6× | 4.7× (better) |
| P/FCF | 23.5× | 6.3× (better) |
| PEG | 0.16 (better) | 0.31 |
| FCF yield | 4.3% | 15.8% (better) |
| Fair value | $1327.69 | $116.44 |
| Margin of safety | 6.3% | 34.9% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 4.3% (better) | 2.5% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 11.2% (better) | 10.4% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −32.5% | 5.8% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −31.9% | 12.1% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 2.7% | 33.1% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | – | 37.4% |
| Operating margin | 5.4% | 18.4% (better) |
| Net margin | 9.7% | 13.2% (better) |
| FCF margin | 4.3% | 19.9% (better) |
| Return on equity | 10.7% | 20.9% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 4.2% | 28.0% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.18 (better) | 0.25 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.55 (better) | −0.62 |
| Interest coverage | 5.4× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.76 | 2.56 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 3.24 | 5.03 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.60% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 9 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 4.4% | – |
| Buyback yield | 3.8% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 4.4% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 65.4% | 112% |
| Held by insiders | 29.2% | 8.8% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | – | $39.6M |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 8.0% | 18.0% |
Go deeper
- GHC stock overview
- GHC income statement
- GHC valuation and score
- LRN stock overview
- LRN income statement
- LRN valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.