Mohawk Industries vs Westlake
MHK and WLK side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How MHK and WLK compare
Mohawk Industries and Westlake are about the same size, with market caps of $9.4B and $8.7B.
Mohawk Industries grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (4.6% versus −4.0% for Westlake).
Mohawk Industries keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 4.2% compared with −10.9% at Westlake.
Westlake pays a dividend yielding 3.1%; Mohawk Industries does not pay one.
Mohawk Industries scores higher on the StockData Score (13 against 9 for Westlake), 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 | MHK | WLK |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $9.4B | $8.7B |
| Share price | $139.41 | $68.28 |
| Change, 1 year | 18.6% | −7.1% |
| Change, 5 years | −21.2% | −31.1% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.22 | 0.93 |
| Employees | 41K | 15K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 13 (better) | 9 |
| Valuation score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 18.5× | – |
| P/S | 0.8× | 0.8× (better) |
| P/B | 1.1× | 1.0× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 8.4× | – |
| P/FCF | 11.6× | – |
| PEG | 0.12 | – |
| FCF yield | 8.6% (better) | −3.0% |
| Fair value | $133.47 | $112.33 |
| Margin of safety | −4.5% | 39.2% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 4.6% (better) | −4.0% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 2.5% | 8.3% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −1.5% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 1.1% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −3.9% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 24.3% (better) | 9.6% |
| Operating margin | 5.1% (better) | −11.0% |
| Net margin | 4.2% (better) | −10.9% |
| FCF margin | 7.3% (better) | −2.3% |
| Return on equity | 5.5% (better) | −13.0% |
| Return on invested capital | 4.9% (better) | −8.0% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.22 (better) | 0.58 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.85 | – |
| Interest coverage | 42.6× (better) | −6.1× |
| Current ratio | 1.92 | 2.45 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 3.06 (better) | 1.71 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 3 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 3.1% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 12 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 14.7% |
| Buyback yield | 2.2% (better) | 0.72% |
| Shareholder yield | 2.2% | 3.8% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 79.8% | 31.1% |
| Held by insiders | 16.0% | 73.9% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$32.1M | −$10.2M (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 9.8% | 14.6% |
Go deeper
- MHK stock overview
- MHK income statement
- MHK valuation and score
- WLK stock overview
- WLK income statement
- WLK valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.