Lifetime Brands vs Sturm Ruger
LCUT and RGR side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How LCUT and RGR compare
Sturm Ruger is the larger company, worth 4.5 times as much as Lifetime Brands ($806M against $179M).
On earnings, Lifetime Brands is cheaper: it trades at 6.0× trailing earnings, against 50.0× for Sturm Ruger.
Sturm Ruger grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (10.6% versus 1.2% for Lifetime Brands).
Lifetime Brands keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 4.3% compared with 2.7% at Sturm Ruger.
Both pay dividends: Lifetime Brands yields 2.2% and Sturm Ruger 0.87%.
Lifetime Brands scores higher on the StockData Score (18 against 11 for Sturm Ruger), 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 | LCUT | RGR |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $179M | $806M |
| Share price | $7.77 | $50.45 |
| Change, 1 year | 139% | 60.8% |
| Change, 5 years | −57.5% | −31.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.98 | 0.35 |
| Employees | 1,080 | 18 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 18 (better) | 11 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 6.0× (better) | 50.0× |
| P/S | 0.3× (better) | 1.3× |
| P/B | 0.8× (better) | 2.7× |
| EV/EBITDA | 2.4× (better) | 18.0× |
| P/FCF | 3.5× (better) | 29.2× |
| FCF yield | 28.4% (better) | 3.4% |
| Fair value | $22.25 | $27.46 |
| Margin of safety | 65.1% (better) | −83.7% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 1.2% | 10.6% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | −3.4% | −0.82% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 530% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 677% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 43.7% (better) | 19.9% |
| Operating margin | 7.4% (better) | 2.5% |
| Net margin | 4.3% (better) | 2.7% |
| FCF margin | 7.6% (better) | 4.6% |
| Return on equity | 14.5% (better) | 5.7% |
| Return on invested capital | 23.4% (better) | 6.0% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.08 | – |
| Interest coverage | 2.9× | 75.1× (better) |
| Current ratio | 2.45 | 3.02 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.89 | 9.27 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.2% (better) | 0.87% |
| Payout ratio | 13.4% | 42.8% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 0.00% (better) | −37.5% |
| Shareholder yield | 2.2% (better) | 0.87% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 43.4% | 59.9% |
| Held by insiders | 47.8% | 27.2% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$355K | $211K (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 14.2% | 9.7% |
Go deeper
- LCUT stock overview
- LCUT income statement
- LCUT valuation and score
- RGR stock overview
- RGR income statement
- RGR valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.