Oil States International vs Solaris Energy Infrastructure
OIS and SEI side by side, both in construction, mining, and materials handling. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How OIS and SEI compare
Solaris Energy Infrastructure is the larger company, worth 9.8 times as much as Oil States International ($5.0B against $508M).
Solaris Energy Infrastructure grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (73.8% versus −0.74% for Oil States International).
Solaris Energy Infrastructure keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 8.0% compared with −16.5% at Oil States International.
Solaris Energy Infrastructure pays a dividend yielding 0.74%; Oil States International does not pay one.
Solaris Energy Infrastructure scores higher on the StockData Score (12 against 5 for Oil States International), 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 | OIS | SEI |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $508M | $5.0B |
| Share price | $8.49 | $64.80 |
| Change, 1 year | 32.2% | 28.7% |
| Change, 5 years | 69.8% | 879% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.93 | 1.42 |
| Employees | 2,172 | 468 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 5 | 12 (better) |
| Valuation score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/S | 0.8× (better) | 5.3× |
| P/B | 0.9× (better) | 3.9× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 18.7× |
| P/FCF | 15.0× | – |
| FCF yield | 6.7% (better) | −21.4% |
| Fair value | $7.84 | $31.65 |
| Margin of safety | −8.3% (better) | −105% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −0.74% | 73.8% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 0.95% | 43.3% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −565% | 96.6% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −592% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 20.2% | – |
| Operating margin | −14.0% | 22.8% (better) |
| Net margin | −16.5% | 8.0% (better) |
| FCF margin | 5.2% (better) | −114% |
| Return on equity | −16.8% | 8.2% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | −11.0% | 10.5% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.03 (better) | 1.35 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 3.73 |
| Interest coverage | – | 4.4× |
| Current ratio | 2.36 (better) | 2.10 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.26 (better) | 1.36 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 0.74% |
| Payout ratio | – | 38.9% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 2.7% |
| Buyback yield | 1.9% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 1.9% (better) | 0.74% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 92.8% | 92.8% |
| Held by insiders | 8.2% | 34.1% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$593K (better) | −$299M |
| Short interest, % of float | 4.0% | 33.3% |
Go deeper
- OIS stock overview
- OIS income statement
- OIS valuation and score
- SEI stock overview
- SEI income statement
- SEI valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.