Global Water Resources vs Middlesex Water
GWRS and MSEX side by side, both in water supply. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How GWRS and MSEX compare
Middlesex Water is the larger company, worth 4.8 times as much as Global Water Resources ($1.1B against $223M).
On earnings, Middlesex Water is cheaper: it trades at 20.5× trailing earnings, against 64.5× for Global Water Resources.
Global Water Resources grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (10.8% versus 8.9% for Middlesex Water).
Middlesex Water keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 24.5% compared with 5.2% at Global Water Resources.
Both pay dividends: Global Water Resources yields 3.9% and Middlesex Water 2.5%.
Middlesex Water scores higher on the StockData Score (14 against 6 for Global Water Resources), 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 | GWRS | MSEX |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $223M | $1.1B |
| Share price | $7.74 | $56.79 |
| Change, 1 year | −22.1% | −2.1% |
| Change, 5 years | −59.3% | −45.1% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.68 | 0.32 |
| Employees | 126 | 395 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 6 | 14 (better) |
| Valuation score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Growth score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Performance score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 1 | 1 |
| Dividend score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 64.5× | 20.5× (better) |
| P/S | 3.7× (better) | 5.0× |
| P/B | 2.6× | 2.0× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 14.0× (better) | 15.3× |
| FCF yield | −10.9% | – |
| Fair value | $6.98 | $64.50 |
| Margin of safety | −10.8% | 12.0% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 10.8% (better) | 8.9% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 7.6% (better) | 6.6% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −43.7% | 20.9% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −45.5% | 15.9% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 17.1% (better) | 1.6% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 13.6% | 30.5% (better) |
| Net margin | 5.2% | 24.5% (better) |
| FCF margin | −40.5% | – |
| Return on equity | 3.9% | 10.1% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 3.0% | 6.5% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.55 | 0.73 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 5.17 | 4.14 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 1.3× | 4.3× (better) |
| Current ratio | 0.68 (better) | 0.51 |
| Altman Z-score | 0.50 | 1.18 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 3.9% (better) | 2.5% |
| Payout ratio | 276% | 51.6% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 16 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 0.68% | 5.8% (better) |
| Buyback yield | −5.9% | −3.6% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | −1.9% | −1.1% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 26.0% | 83.3% |
| Held by insiders | 55.5% | 1.8% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $7.2M (better) | $16.3K |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.9% | – |
Go deeper
- GWRS stock overview
- GWRS income statement
- GWRS valuation and score
- MSEX stock overview
- MSEX income statement
- MSEX valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.