Howmet Aerospace vs Mueller Industries
HWM and MLI side by side, both in rolling, drawing, and extruding of nonferrous. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How HWM and MLI compare
Howmet Aerospace is the larger company, worth 6.6 times as much as Mueller Industries ($79.4B against $12.1B).
On earnings, Mueller Industries is cheaper: it trades at 14.2× trailing earnings, against 39.0× for Howmet Aerospace.
Howmet Aerospace grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (22.0% versus 14.8% for Mueller Industries).
Howmet Aerospace keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 21.1% compared with 18.2% at Mueller Industries.
Both pay dividends: Howmet Aerospace yields 0.25% and Mueller Industries 1.2%.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | HWM | MLI |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $79.4B | $12.1B |
| Share price | $199.22 | $54.56 |
| Change, 1 year | −2.1% | 4.2% |
| Change, 5 years | 496% | 287% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.15 | 0.89 |
| Employees | 730 | 4,832 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 17 | 17 |
| Valuation score | 1 | 1 |
| Growth score | 5 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 6 | 6 |
| Health score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 39.0× | 14.2× (better) |
| P/S | 8.2× | 2.6× (better) |
| P/B | 13.8× | 3.4× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 27.3× | 9.4× (better) |
| P/FCF | 41.2× | 18.1× (better) |
| PEG | 0.79 (better) | 2.52 |
| FCF yield | 2.4% | 5.5% (better) |
| Fair value | $147.92 | $54.07 |
| Margin of safety | −34.7% | −0.90% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 22.0% (better) | 14.8% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.4% | 11.7% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 41.6% (better) | 19.8% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 43.5% (better) | 21.9% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 40.9% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 36.6% (better) | 28.8% |
| Operating margin | 28.1% (better) | 23.0% |
| Net margin | 21.1% (better) | 18.2% |
| FCF margin | 19.8% (better) | 14.3% |
| Return on equity | 37.7% (better) | 26.3% |
| Return on invested capital | 25.7% | 40.3% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.77 | 0.00 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.29 (better) | −1.24 |
| Interest coverage | – | 5352× |
| Current ratio | 1.86 | 4.78 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 8.52 | 14.53 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 7 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.25% | 1.2% (better) |
| Payout ratio | – | 15.4% |
| Years of dividend growth | 5 | 5 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 85.6% (better) | 38.0% |
| Buyback yield | 1.6% (better) | 0.63% |
| Shareholder yield | 1.9% (better) | 1.8% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 91.4% | 95.5% |
| Held by insiders | 1.0% | 3.1% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$22.9M (better) | −$45.1M |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.6% | 2.2% |
Go deeper
- HWM stock overview
- HWM income statement
- HWM valuation and score
- MLI stock overview
- MLI income statement
- MLI valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.