Home Depot vs Tractor Supply
HD and TSCO side by side, both in consumer discretionary. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How HD and TSCO compare
Home Depot is the larger company, worth 18 times as much as Tractor Supply ($350B against $19.1B).
Tractor Supply grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (3.5% versus 2.5% for Home Depot).
Tractor Supply keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 11.6% compared with 8.4% at Home Depot.
Both pay dividends: Home Depot yields 2.6% and Tractor Supply 2.6%.
Tractor Supply scores higher on the StockData Score (17 against 15 for Home Depot), 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 | HD | TSCO |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $350B | $19.1B |
| Share price | $351.31 | $36.74 |
| Change, 1 year | −5.2% | −33.8% |
| Change, 5 years | −14.0% | −20.3% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.88 | 0.68 |
| Employees | 472K | 52K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 15 | 17 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Growth score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 24.6× | – |
| P/S | 2.1× | 1.2× (better) |
| P/B | 21.1× | 7.2× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 16.4× | 11.6× (better) |
| P/FCF | 23.2× (better) | 66.0× |
| FCF yield | 4.3% (better) | 1.5% |
| Fair value | $266.71 | $34.76 |
| Margin of safety | −31.7% | −5.7% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 2.5% | 3.5% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.5% | 7.9% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −2.7% | 67.0% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −2.9% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 3.6% | 10.1% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 33.2% | 36.2% (better) |
| Operating margin | 12.4% (better) | 8.2% |
| Net margin | 8.4% | 11.6% (better) |
| FCF margin | 8.9% (better) | 1.8% |
| Return on equity | 104% (better) | 70.5% |
| Return on invested capital | 25.0% (better) | 23.5% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 3.18 | 0.84 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.07 | 1.11 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 8.7× | 18.0× (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.08 | 1.38 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 5.73 (better) | 3.87 |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.6% (better) | 2.6% |
| Payout ratio | 64.8% | 27.0% |
| Years of dividend growth | 16 | 16 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 8.9% | 25.1% (better) |
| Buyback yield | −0.10% | 2.4% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 2.5% | 5.0% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 75.2% | 94.7% |
| Held by insiders | 0.07% | 0.32% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$6.7M (better) | −$11.3M |
| Superinvestors holding | 4 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.2% | 7.6% |
Go deeper
- HD stock overview
- HD income statement
- HD valuation and score
- TSCO stock overview
- TSCO income statement
- TSCO valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.