Mistras vs Tetra Tech
MG and TTEK side by side, both in engineering, accounting, research, management, and related services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How MG and TTEK compare
Tetra Tech is the larger company, worth 15 times as much as Mistras ($9.9B against $643M).
On earnings, Tetra Tech is cheaper: it trades at 23.3× trailing earnings, against 24.3× for Mistras.
Mistras grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (5.2% versus −7.6% for Tetra Tech).
Tetra Tech pays a dividend yielding 0.71%; Mistras does not pay one.
Tetra Tech scores higher on the StockData Score (15 against 13 for Mistras), 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 | MG | TTEK |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $643M | $9.9B |
| Share price | $20.18 | $38.65 |
| Change, 1 year | 109% | 21.4% |
| Change, 5 years | 114% | 9.3% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.67 | 0.87 |
| Employees | 4,800 | 25K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 13 | 15 (better) |
| Valuation score | 4 | 4 |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Performance score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Health score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 24.3× | 23.3× (better) |
| P/S | 0.9× (better) | 2.0× |
| P/B | 2.7× (better) | 5.3× |
| EV/EBITDA | 11.1× (better) | 15.6× |
| P/FCF | 22.2× | 18.1× (better) |
| PEG | 0.67 | – |
| FCF yield | 4.5% | 5.5% (better) |
| Fair value | $22.47 | $41.81 |
| Margin of safety | 10.2% (better) | 7.6% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 5.2% (better) | −7.6% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.1% | 12.7% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 136% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 131% (better) | 108% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 8.0% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 28.5% (better) | 18.8% |
| Operating margin | 6.9% | 12.1% (better) |
| Net margin | 3.6% | – |
| FCF margin | 3.9% | 10.8% (better) |
| Return on equity | 11.8% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 10.0% | 18.8% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.72 | 0.43 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.10 | 0.85 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 3.6× | 15.4× (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.71 (better) | 1.18 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.90 | 4.65 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 | – |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 0.71% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 11 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 14.0% |
| Buyback yield | – | 2.5% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 3.3% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 62.4% | 98.9% |
| Held by insiders | 68.2% | 5.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$61.7K (better) | −$351K |
| Short interest, % of float | 9.3% | 4.9% |
Go deeper
- MG stock overview
- MG income statement
- MG valuation and score
- TTEK stock overview
- TTEK income statement
- TTEK valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.