Graham vs Gorman Rupp
GHM and GRC side by side, both in general industrial machinery and equipment. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How GHM and GRC compare
Gorman Rupp is the larger company, worth 2.3 times as much as Graham ($1.9B against $821M).
On earnings, Gorman Rupp is cheaper: it trades at 30.4× trailing earnings, against 67.3× for Graham.
Graham grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (21.2% versus 4.2% for Gorman Rupp).
Gorman Rupp keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 8.9% compared with 4.5% at Graham.
Gorman Rupp pays a dividend yielding 1.1%; Graham does not pay one.
Graham scores higher on the StockData Score (14 against 13 for Gorman Rupp), 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 | GHM | GRC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $821M | $1.9B |
| Share price | $69.95 | $71.93 |
| Change, 1 year | 15.5% | 61.2% |
| Change, 5 years | 409% | 54.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.14 | 0.79 |
| Employees | 732 | 1,415 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 14 (better) | 13 |
| Valuation score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Performance score | 2 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 67.3× | 30.4× (better) |
| P/S | 3.1× | 2.7× (better) |
| P/B | 4.3× (better) | 4.3× |
| EV/EBITDA | 34.2× | 17.1× (better) |
| P/FCF | – | 18.9× |
| PEG | 0.29 | – |
| FCF yield | −0.75% | 5.3% (better) |
| Fair value | $53.13 | $61.18 |
| Margin of safety | −31.7% | −17.6% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 21.2% (better) | 4.2% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 20.3% (better) | 14.4% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −14.7% | 20.3% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −16.8% | 20.3% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 36.1% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 23.3% | 31.4% (better) |
| Operating margin | 5.4% | 14.8% (better) |
| Net margin | 4.5% | 8.9% (better) |
| FCF margin | −2.3% | 14.3% (better) |
| Return on equity | 7.5% | 14.9% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 8.7% | 11.6% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.62 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −1.16 | 1.86 (better) |
| Interest coverage | – | 5.0× |
| Current ratio | 1.23 | 2.81 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 4.26 | 4.83 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 1.1% |
| Buyback yield | −6.2% | 0.14% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | −6.2% | 1.2% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 91.0% | 66.0% |
| Held by insiders | 6.3% | 14.8% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | – | −$400K |
| Short interest, % of float | 8.7% | 2.9% |
Go deeper
- GHM stock overview
- GHM income statement
- GHM valuation and score
- GRC stock overview
- GRC income statement
- GRC valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.