Hecla Mining vs United States Lime & Minerals
HL and USLM 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 USLM compare
Hecla Mining is the larger company, worth 2.8 times as much as United States Lime & Minerals ($9.1B against $3.2B).
On earnings, United States Lime & Minerals is cheaper: it trades at 24.1× trailing earnings, against 27.6× for Hecla Mining.
Hecla Mining grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (74.4% versus 4.5% for United States Lime & Minerals).
United States Lime & Minerals keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 35.1% compared with 20.8% at Hecla Mining.
Both pay dividends: Hecla Mining yields 0.12% and United States Lime & Minerals 0.22%.
Hecla Mining scores higher on the StockData Score (22 against 17 for United States Lime & Minerals), 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 | USLM |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $9.1B | $3.2B |
| Share price | $13.53 | $111.61 |
| Change, 1 year | 8.0% | −12.6% |
| Change, 5 years | 126% | 317% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.27 | 0.93 |
| Employees | 1,865 | 346 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 22 (better) | 17 |
| Valuation score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Health score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 27.6× | 24.1× (better) |
| P/S | 5.7× (better) | 8.4× |
| P/B | 3.4× (better) | 4.4× |
| EV/EBITDA | 9.4× (better) | 15.1× |
| P/FCF | 18.8× (better) | 32.4× |
| PEG | – | 0.56 |
| FCF yield | 5.3% (better) | 3.1% |
| Fair value | $19.71 | $90.26 |
| Margin of safety | 31.3% (better) | −23.7% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 74.4% (better) | 4.5% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 15.5% | 18.3% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 233% (better) | 2.3% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 206% (better) | 2.0% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 36.1% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 53.8% (better) | 47.6% |
| Operating margin | 46.0% (better) | 41.2% |
| Net margin | 20.8% | 35.1% (better) |
| FCF margin | 30.2% (better) | 25.9% |
| Return on equity | 13.4% | 20.0% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 23.0% | 44.9% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 (better) | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.52 | – |
| Current ratio | 5.20 | 22.29 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 12.21 | 32.95 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.12% | 0.22% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 3.2% | 5.1% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 19.7% (better) | 13.4% |
| Buyback yield | −0.41% | 0.08% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | −0.30% | 0.30% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 72.2% | 32.6% |
| Held by insiders | 0.79% | 62.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$10.2M | −$154K (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 5.6% | 10.6% |
Go deeper
- HL stock overview
- HL income statement
- HL valuation and score
- USLM stock overview
- USLM income statement
- USLM valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.