Hornbeck Offshore Services vs Bristow
HOS and VTOL side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How HOS and VTOL compare
Bristow is the larger company, worth 1.4 times as much as Hornbeck Offshore Services ($1.2B against $874M).
Hornbeck Offshore Services grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (50.5% versus 10.1% for Bristow).
Bristow keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 5.0% compared with −10.6% at Hornbeck Offshore Services.
Bristow pays a dividend yielding 0.93%; Hornbeck Offshore Services does not pay one.
Bristow scores higher on the StockData Score (12 against 8 for Hornbeck Offshore Services), 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 | HOS | VTOL |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $874M | $1.2B |
| Share price | $5.93 | $40.30 |
| Change, 1 year | −10.8% | 6.7% |
| Change, 5 years | 81.9% | 22.3% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.98 | 1.11 |
| Employees | 2,212 | 3,660 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 8 | 12 (better) |
| Valuation score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Health score | 2 | 2 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 15.0× |
| P/S | 0.5× (better) | 0.7× |
| P/B | 0.4× (better) | 1.1× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 6.7× |
| P/FCF | – | 97.5× |
| FCF yield | – | 1.0% |
| Fair value | $11.67 | $48.91 |
| Margin of safety | 49.2% (better) | 17.6% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 50.5% (better) | 10.1% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 12.0% | 45.2% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −337% | −43.5% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | −43.9% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 10.1% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | −8.4% | 9.5% (better) |
| Net margin | −10.6% | 5.0% (better) |
| FCF margin | – | 0.76% |
| Return on equity | −13.3% | 7.5% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | −7.0% | 8.4% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.36 (better) | 0.68 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 1.99 |
| Interest coverage | −3.1× | 3.2× (better) |
| Current ratio | 2.00 (better) | 1.99 |
| Altman Z-score | 0.90 | 1.88 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 0.93% |
| Buyback yield | – | 3.5% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 4.5% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 92.8% | 100% |
| Held by insiders | 48.4% | 18.5% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $1.5M (better) | −$10.1M |
| Short interest, % of float | 12.8% | 4.7% |
Go deeper
- HOS stock overview
- HOS income statement
- HOS valuation and score
- VTOL stock overview
- VTOL income statement
- VTOL valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.