Hayward vs Middleby
HAYW and MIDD side by side, both in industrial and commercial machinery and computer equipment. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How HAYW and MIDD compare
Middleby is the larger company, worth 1.8 times as much as Hayward ($6.3B against $3.5B).
Middleby grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (8.4% versus 7.6% for Hayward).
Hayward keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 14.4% compared with −13.9% at Middleby.
Hayward scores higher on the StockData Score (15 against 8 for Middleby), 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 | HAYW | MIDD |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $3.5B | $6.3B |
| Share price | $16.77 | $138.27 |
| Change, 1 year | 4.0% | 12.2% |
| Change, 5 years | −38.4% | −26.3% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.09 | 1.08 |
| Employees | 1,980 | 2,393 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 15 (better) | 8 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 3 | 3 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 21.5× | – |
| P/S | 3.0× | 1.8× (better) |
| P/B | 2.2× (better) | 2.8× |
| EV/EBITDA | 15.5× | 12.2× (better) |
| P/FCF | 21.7× | 13.0× (better) |
| FCF yield | 4.6% | 7.7% (better) |
| Fair value | $17.95 | $149.50 |
| Margin of safety | 6.6% | 7.5% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 7.6% | 8.4% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 5.1% (better) | 5.0% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 23.1% (better) | −211% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 25.8% (better) | −217% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 22.2% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 48.0% (better) | 38.4% |
| Operating margin | 21.6% (better) | 16.5% |
| Net margin | 14.4% (better) | −13.9% |
| FCF margin | 13.6% | 14.2% (better) |
| Return on equity | 10.9% (better) | −16.2% |
| Return on invested capital | 10.3% (better) | 8.5% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.60 (better) | 0.90 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.88 (better) | 2.74 |
| Current ratio | 3.33 (better) | 1.99 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.72 | 3.41 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 3 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.00% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | – |
| Buyback yield | 3.4% | 15.0% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 3.4% | 15.0% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 106% | 105% |
| Held by insiders | 4.0% | 9.3% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$12.0M | $15.1M (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 5.0% | 3.7% |
Go deeper
- HAYW stock overview
- HAYW income statement
- HAYW valuation and score
- MIDD stock overview
- MIDD income statement
- MIDD valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.