Hecla Mining vs Knife River
HL and KNF side by side, both in mining & quarrying of nonmetallic minerals (no fuels). Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How HL and KNF compare
Hecla Mining is the larger company, worth 2.8 times as much as Knife River ($9.1B against $3.3B).
On earnings, Knife River is cheaper: it trades at 23.5× trailing earnings, against 27.6× for Hecla Mining.
Hecla Mining grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (74.4% versus 12.1% for Knife River).
Hecla Mining keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 20.8% compared with 4.2% at Knife River.
Hecla Mining pays a dividend yielding 0.12%; Knife River does not pay one.
Hecla Mining scores higher on the StockData Score (22 against 11 for Knife River), 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 | HL | KNF |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $9.1B | $3.3B |
| Share price | $13.53 | $57.50 |
| Change, 1 year | 8.0% | −5.2% |
| Change, 5 years | 126% | – |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.27 | 1.06 |
| Employees | 1,865 | 5,298 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 22 (better) | 11 |
| Valuation score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 1 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 27.6× | 23.5× (better) |
| P/S | 5.7× | 1.0× (better) |
| P/B | 3.4× | 2.0× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 9.4× (better) | 9.9× |
| P/FCF | 18.8× (better) | 75.8× |
| PEG | – | 2.25 |
| FCF yield | 5.3% (better) | 1.3% |
| Fair value | $19.71 | $57.88 |
| Margin of safety | 31.3% (better) | 0.65% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 74.4% (better) | 12.1% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 15.5% | – |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 233% (better) | −8.7% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 206% (better) | −8.9% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 53.8% (better) | 17.8% |
| Operating margin | 46.0% (better) | 8.3% |
| Net margin | 20.8% (better) | 4.2% |
| FCF margin | 30.2% (better) | 1.3% |
| Return on equity | 13.4% (better) | 9.1% |
| Return on invested capital | 23.0% (better) | 6.8% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 (better) | 1.01 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.52 | 3.23 (better) |
| Interest coverage | – | 3.1× |
| Current ratio | 5.20 (better) | 2.66 |
| Altman Z-score | 12.21 (better) | 2.33 |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 3 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.12% | – |
| Payout ratio | 3.2% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 19.7% | – |
| Buyback yield | −0.41% | – |
| Shareholder yield | −0.30% | 0.00% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 72.2% | 96.7% |
| Held by insiders | 0.79% | 0.70% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$10.2M | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 5.6% | 7.9% |
Go deeper
- HL stock overview
- HL income statement
- HL valuation and score
- KNF stock overview
- KNF income statement
- KNF valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.