Goodyear Tire & Rubber vs NIKE
GT and NKE side by side, both in rubber and miscellaneous plastics products. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How GT and NKE compare
NIKE is the larger company, worth 46 times as much as Goodyear Tire & Rubber ($57.4B against $1.2B).
NIKE grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (−1.2% versus −4.3% for Goodyear Tire & Rubber).
NIKE keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 6.7% compared with −14.4% at Goodyear Tire & Rubber.
NIKE pays a dividend yielding 4.2%; Goodyear Tire & Rubber does not pay one.
NIKE scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 4 for Goodyear Tire & Rubber), 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 | GT | NKE |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $1.2B | $57.4B |
| Share price | $4.29 | $38.67 |
| Change, 1 year | −38.9% | −40.8% |
| Change, 5 years | −82.2% | −78.2% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.34 | 1.02 |
| Employees | 63K | 73K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 4 | 16 (better) |
| Valuation score | 3 | 3 |
| Growth score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Performance score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Health score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 18.6× |
| P/S | 0.1× (better) | 1.3× |
| P/B | 0.4× (better) | 3.8× |
| EV/EBITDA | 16.0× | 12.6× (better) |
| P/FCF | 6.4× (better) | 27.3× |
| FCF yield | 15.5% (better) | 3.7% |
| Fair value | $42.12 | $47.64 |
| Margin of safety | 89.8% (better) | 18.8% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −4.3% | −1.2% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 8.2% (better) | 0.82% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −728% | 6.8% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −735% | 6.7% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | −10.0% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 18.3% | 43.1% (better) |
| Net margin | −14.4% | 6.7% (better) |
| FCF margin | 1.1% | 4.6% (better) |
| Return on equity | −63.9% | 21.6% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 2.53 | 0.52 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 13.10 | 0.21 (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.09 | 2.07 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.26 | 3.13 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.00% | 4.2% (better) |
| Payout ratio | – | 78.4% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 17 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 8.8% |
| Buyback yield | – | 0.03% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 4.3% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 93.9% | 65.0% |
| Held by insiders | 0.74% | 15.7% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $755K | $1.5M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 18.3% | 7.9% |
Go deeper
- GT stock overview
- GT income statement
- GT valuation and score
- NKE stock overview
- NKE income statement
- NKE valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.