Patrick Industries vs Thor Industries
PATK and THO side by side, both in motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How PATK and THO compare
Thor Industries is the larger company, worth 1.5 times as much as Patrick Industries ($4.0B against $2.6B).
On earnings, Patrick Industries is cheaper: it trades at 21.0× trailing earnings, against 22.8× for Thor Industries.
Patrick Industries grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (1.7% versus 0.30% for Thor Industries).
Patrick Industries keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 3.4% compared with 1.8% at Thor Industries.
Both pay dividends: Patrick Industries yields 2.3% and Thor Industries 2.0%.
Patrick Industries scores higher on the StockData Score (12 against 10 for Thor Industries), 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 | PATK | THO |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $2.6B | $4.0B |
| Share price | $80.69 | $77.04 |
| Change, 1 year | −21.9% | −24.0% |
| Change, 5 years | 51.3% | −30.1% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.10 | 1.22 |
| Employees | 7,500 | 20K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 12 (better) | 10 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Health score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 21.0× (better) | 22.8× |
| P/S | 0.7× | 0.4× (better) |
| P/B | 2.3× | 0.9× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 9.4× | 7.9× (better) |
| P/FCF | 12.7× | – |
| FCF yield | 7.8% | – |
| Fair value | $69.32 | $70.52 |
| Margin of safety | −16.4% | −9.2% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 1.7% (better) | 0.30% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.7% (better) | −4.8% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 10.4% (better) | −31.3% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 10.0% (better) | −30.2% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 6.9% (better) | −22.2% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 23.3% (better) | 12.6% |
| Operating margin | 6.3% | – |
| Net margin | 3.4% (better) | 1.8% |
| FCF margin | 5.2% | – |
| Return on equity | 11.5% (better) | 4.2% |
| Return on invested capital | 7.6% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.21 | 0.20 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.24 | 0.70 (better) |
| Current ratio | 2.51 (better) | 1.77 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.88 | 3.37 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.3% (better) | 2.0% |
| Payout ratio | 46.1% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 9 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 4.9% |
| Buyback yield | 4.1% (better) | 2.9% |
| Shareholder yield | 6.4% (better) | 4.9% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 112% | 107% |
| Held by insiders | 4.4% | 14.3% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$1.9M | −$473K (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 2 |
| Short interest, % of float | 17.1% | 10.9% |
Go deeper
- PATK stock overview
- PATK income statement
- PATK valuation and score
- THO stock overview
- THO income statement
- THO valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.