Hyster-Yale vs Manitowoc
HY and MTW side by side, both in construction, mining, and materials handling. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How HY and MTW compare
Manitowoc is the larger company, worth 1.8 times as much as Hyster-Yale ($859M against $488M).
Manitowoc grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (10.2% versus −14.2% for Hyster-Yale).
Manitowoc keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 1.1% compared with −3.9% at Hyster-Yale.
Hyster-Yale pays a dividend yielding 5.3%; Manitowoc does not pay one.
Hyster-Yale scores higher on the StockData Score (7 against 5 for Manitowoc), 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 | HY | MTW |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $488M | $859M |
| Share price | $27.22 | $23.81 |
| Change, 1 year | −8.6% | 109% |
| Change, 5 years | −33.9% | 18.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.13 | 1.41 |
| Employees | 7,500 | 4,700 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 7 (better) | 5 |
| Valuation score | 2 | 2 |
| Growth score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Performance score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Health score | 1 | 1 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 33.5× |
| P/S | 0.1× (better) | 0.4× |
| P/B | 1.3× | 1.2× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 8.7× |
| P/FCF | 104× | 17.4× (better) |
| FCF yield | 0.96% | 5.7% (better) |
| Fair value | $60.32 | $23.19 |
| Margin of safety | 54.9% (better) | −2.7% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −14.2% | 10.2% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 6.0% | 9.2% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −4896% | −54.0% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −5286% | −53.6% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 15.1% | 19.1% (better) |
| Operating margin | −2.8% | 3.6% (better) |
| Net margin | −3.9% | 1.1% (better) |
| FCF margin | 0.14% | 2.1% (better) |
| Return on equity | −28.6% | 3.8% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | −9.4% | 4.6% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.06 | 0.67 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 2.83 |
| Interest coverage | −3.1× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.24 | 2.11 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.06 | 2.36 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 3 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 5.3% | – |
| Payout ratio | – | 0.00% |
| Years of dividend growth | 12 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 2.4% | – |
| Buyback yield | −1.7% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 3.6% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 48.6% | 83.9% |
| Held by insiders | 48.4% | 5.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | – | −$106K |
| Short interest, % of float | 7.1% | 5.1% |
Go deeper
- HY stock overview
- HY income statement
- HY valuation and score
- MTW stock overview
- MTW income statement
- MTW valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.