Hayward vs Tennant
HAYW and TNC 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 TNC compare
Hayward is the larger company, worth 2.7 times as much as Tennant ($3.5B against $1.3B).
On earnings, Hayward is cheaper: it trades at 21.5× trailing earnings, against 75.5× for Tennant.
Hayward grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (7.6% versus −2.9% for Tennant).
Hayward keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 14.4% compared with 1.5% at Tennant.
Tennant pays a dividend yielding 1.6%; Hayward does not pay one.
Hayward scores higher on the StockData Score (15 against 8 for Tennant), 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 | TNC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $3.5B | $1.3B |
| Share price | $16.77 | $76.25 |
| Change, 1 year | 4.0% | 3.1% |
| Change, 5 years | −38.4% | −7.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.09 | 0.86 |
| Employees | 1,980 | 4,484 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 15 (better) | 8 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 1 |
| Health score | 3 | 3 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 21.5× (better) | 75.5× |
| P/S | 3.0× | 1.1× (better) |
| P/B | 2.2× (better) | 2.4× |
| EV/EBITDA | 15.5× (better) | 40.7× |
| P/FCF | 21.7× | – |
| FCF yield | 4.6% (better) | −0.21% |
| Fair value | $17.95 | $34.25 |
| Margin of safety | 6.6% (better) | −123% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 7.6% (better) | −2.9% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 5.1% (better) | 3.8% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 23.1% (better) | −69.9% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 25.8% (better) | −68.5% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 22.2% (better) | 5.5% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 48.0% (better) | 38.8% |
| Operating margin | 21.6% (better) | 3.2% |
| Net margin | 14.4% (better) | 1.5% |
| FCF margin | 13.6% (better) | −0.22% |
| Return on equity | 10.9% (better) | 3.1% |
| Return on invested capital | 10.3% (better) | 3.6% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.60 (better) | 0.67 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.88 (better) | 7.25 |
| Current ratio | 3.33 (better) | 2.04 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.72 | 3.04 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.00% | 1.6% (better) |
| Payout ratio | – | 119% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 16 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 6.1% |
| Buyback yield | 3.4% | 9.1% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 3.4% | 10.7% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 106% | 108% |
| Held by insiders | 4.0% | 6.9% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$12.0M | $882K (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 5.0% | 8.4% |
Go deeper
- HAYW stock overview
- HAYW income statement
- HAYW valuation and score
- TNC stock overview
- TNC income statement
- TNC valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.