M/I Homes vs PulteGroup
MHO and PHM side by side, both in operative builders. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How MHO and PHM compare
PulteGroup is the larger company, worth 7.2 times as much as M/I Homes ($23.4B against $3.2B).
On earnings, M/I Homes is cheaper: it trades at 10.8× trailing earnings, against 12.7× for PulteGroup.
M/I Homes grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (−5.0% versus −7.3% for PulteGroup).
PulteGroup keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 11.6% compared with 7.4% at M/I Homes.
PulteGroup pays a dividend yielding 0.83%; M/I Homes does not pay one.
PulteGroup scores higher on the StockData Score (13 against 11 for M/I Homes), 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 | MHO | PHM |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $3.2B | $23.4B |
| Share price | $128.28 | $124.74 |
| Change, 1 year | 2.6% | 5.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 115% | 147% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.18 | 1.01 |
| Employees | 1,801 | 6,506 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 11 | 13 (better) |
| Valuation score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 3 | 3 |
| Health score | 5 | 5 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 10.8× (better) | 12.7× |
| P/S | 0.8× (better) | 1.4× |
| P/B | 1.0× (better) | 1.8× |
| EV/EBITDA | 6.3× | – |
| P/FCF | 16.5× | 15.5× (better) |
| PEG | – | 38.39 |
| FCF yield | 6.0% | 6.5% (better) |
| Fair value | $120.59 | $104.35 |
| Margin of safety | −6.4% (better) | −19.5% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −5.0% (better) | −7.3% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 7.7% | 9.4% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −37.9% | −30.5% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −34.8% | −26.8% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 12.4% | 16.5% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 21.5% | – |
| Operating margin | 9.3% | – |
| Net margin | 7.4% | 11.6% (better) |
| FCF margin | 4.6% | 9.2% (better) |
| Return on equity | 10.1% | 14.9% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 13.1% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Altman Z-score | 3.33 | 3.57 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 0.83% |
| Payout ratio | – | 9.9% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 8 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 13.0% |
| Buyback yield | 6.2% (better) | 5.5% |
| Shareholder yield | 6.2% | 6.3% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 97.8% | 95.3% |
| Held by insiders | 3.5% | 0.66% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$22.8M (better) | −$26.4M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 6.1% | 4.4% |
Go deeper
- MHO stock overview
- MHO income statement
- MHO valuation and score
- PHM stock overview
- PHM income statement
- PHM valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.