Gorman Rupp vs Perma-Pipe International
GRC and PPIH 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 GRC and PPIH compare
Gorman Rupp is the larger company, worth 7.8 times as much as Perma-Pipe International ($1.9B against $237M).
On earnings, Perma-Pipe International is cheaper: it trades at 15.2× trailing earnings, against 25.2× for Gorman Rupp.
Perma-Pipe International grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (24.8% versus 6.5% for Gorman Rupp).
Gorman Rupp keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 10.2% compared with 6.9% at Perma-Pipe International.
Gorman Rupp pays a dividend yielding 1.1%; Perma-Pipe International does not pay one.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | GRC | PPIH |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $1.9B | $237M |
| Share price | $70.44 | $28.97 |
| Change, 1 year | 58.3% | 3.6% |
| Change, 5 years | 55.4% | 244% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.81 | 0.56 |
| Employees | 1,415 | 909 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 15 | 15 |
| Valuation score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Growth score | 3 | 3 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 25.2× | 15.2× (better) |
| P/S | 2.6× | 1.1× (better) |
| P/B | 4.0× | 2.5× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 15.0× | 7.2× (better) |
| P/FCF | 16.9× (better) | 17.4× |
| PEG | – | 0.36 |
| FCF yield | 5.9% (better) | 5.7% |
| Fair value | $68.15 | $36.89 |
| Margin of safety | −3.4% | 21.5% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 6.5% | 24.8% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 14.4% | 20.0% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 46.7% | 55.0% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 46.6% | 53.2% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 32.5% (better) | 31.1% |
| Operating margin | 16.1% (better) | 12.1% |
| Net margin | 10.2% (better) | 6.9% |
| FCF margin | 15.3% (better) | 6.0% |
| Return on equity | 17.0% | 17.9% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 13.5% | 25.6% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.54 | 0.39 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.40 | 0.13 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 6.0× | – |
| Current ratio | 2.70 (better) | 2.19 |
| Altman Z-score | 4.90 (better) | 3.06 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.1% | – |
| Buyback yield | 0.14% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 1.2% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 66.0% | 51.1% |
| Held by insiders | 14.8% | 2.3% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$400K | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.2% | 4.4% |
Go deeper
- GRC stock overview
- GRC income statement
- GRC valuation and score
- PPIH stock overview
- PPIH income statement
- PPIH valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.