W.W. Grainger vs LKQ
GWW and LKQ side by side, both in wholesale trade-durable goods. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How GWW and LKQ compare
W.W. Grainger is the larger company, worth 14 times as much as LKQ ($64.0B against $4.7B).
On earnings, LKQ is cheaper: it trades at 18.6× trailing earnings, against 34.6× for W.W. Grainger.
W.W. Grainger grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (7.8% versus −0.42% for LKQ).
W.W. Grainger keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 9.9% compared with 1.9% at LKQ.
Both pay dividends: W.W. Grainger yields 0.70% and LKQ 6.5%.
W.W. Grainger scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 14 for LKQ), 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 | GWW | LKQ |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $64.0B | $4.7B |
| Share price | $1359.17 | $18.56 |
| Change, 1 year | 41.7% | −38.2% |
| Change, 5 years | 187% | −67.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.82 | 0.77 |
| Employees | 25K | 44K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 16 (better) | 14 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 5 (better) |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 4 | 4 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 34.6× | 18.6× (better) |
| P/S | 3.4× | 0.3× (better) |
| P/B | 15.5× | 0.7× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 21.5× | 4.3× (better) |
| P/FCF | 42.4× | 7.7× (better) |
| PEG | 6.18 | – |
| FCF yield | 2.4% | 13.0% (better) |
| Fair value | $855.20 | $32.96 |
| Margin of safety | −58.9% | 43.7% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 7.8% (better) | −0.42% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 8.7% (better) | 3.3% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −2.7% (better) | −63.7% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −0.71% (better) | −63.0% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 22.5% (better) | 2.4% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 39.4% (better) | 38.1% |
| Operating margin | 14.6% (better) | 4.8% |
| Net margin | 9.9% (better) | 1.9% |
| FCF margin | 8.0% (better) | 4.5% |
| Return on equity | 47.9% (better) | 4.0% |
| Return on invested capital | 35.6% (better) | 7.0% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.58 (better) | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.59 | – |
| Current ratio | 2.81 (better) | 1.75 |
| Altman Z-score | 13.22 (better) | 2.32 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.70% | 6.5% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 26.5% | 120% |
| Years of dividend growth | 16 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 8.3% | – |
| Buyback yield | 1.6% | 2.6% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 2.3% | 9.1% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 75.0% | 110% |
| Held by insiders | 6.3% | 0.74% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$33.5M | – |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 2 |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.8% | 6.5% |
Go deeper
- GWW stock overview
- GWW income statement
- GWW valuation and score
- LKQ stock overview
- LKQ income statement
- LKQ valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.