International Paper vs Sylvamo
IP and SLVM side by side, both in paper and allied products. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How IP and SLVM compare
International Paper is the larger company, worth 15 times as much as Sylvamo ($19.1B against $1.3B).
International Paper grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (25.4% versus −7.1% for Sylvamo).
Sylvamo keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 2.3% compared with −14.2% at International Paper.
Both pay dividends: International Paper yields 5.1% and Sylvamo 5.6%.
International Paper scores higher on the StockData Score (11 against 10 for Sylvamo), 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 | IP | SLVM |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $19.1B | $1.3B |
| Share price | $36.03 | $32.24 |
| Change, 1 year | −23.6% | −22.8% |
| Change, 5 years | −26.3% | 14.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.82 | 0.69 |
| Employees | 63K | 6,500 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 11 (better) | 10 |
| Valuation score | 2 | 2 |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Health score | 3 | 3 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 17.2× |
| P/S | 0.8× | 0.4× (better) |
| P/B | 1.3× (better) | 1.3× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 5.8× |
| P/FCF | 38.8× | – |
| PEG | – | 2.54 |
| FCF yield | 2.6% (better) | −0.86% |
| Fair value | $40.27 | $50.15 |
| Margin of safety | 10.5% | 35.7% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 25.4% (better) | −7.1% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 6.1% | 7.0% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | −65.1% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | −64.2% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | −3.4% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 29.8% (better) | 20.6% |
| Operating margin | – | 5.3% |
| Net margin | −14.2% | 2.3% (better) |
| FCF margin | 2.0% (better) | −0.33% |
| Return on equity | −20.8% | 7.9% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | – | 5.7% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.64 (better) | 0.93 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 2.15 |
| Interest coverage | – | 3.4× |
| Current ratio | 1.10 | 1.47 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.38 | 3.10 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 5.1% | 5.6% (better) |
| Payout ratio | – | 96.1% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | −2.0% | – |
| Buyback yield | 0.17% | 3.3% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 5.3% | 8.9% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 101% | 99.7% |
| Held by insiders | 0.18% | 17.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $2.5M (better) | −$801K |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 8.8% |
Go deeper
- IP stock overview
- IP income statement
- IP valuation and score
- SLVM stock overview
- SLVM income statement
- SLVM valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.