Powerbank vs PMA Graphene Technology
PBK and PMA side by side, both in construction special trade contractors. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How PBK and PMA compare
Powerbank grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (−34.0% versus −56.8% for PMA Graphene Technology).
PMA Graphene Technology keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of −39.4% compared with −88.5% at Powerbank.
Powerbank scores higher on the StockData Score (3 against 0 for PMA Graphene Technology), 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 | PBK | PMA |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Share price | $0.135 | $1.36 |
| Change, 1 year | −91.6% | −27.7% |
| Beta (5Y) | – | 1.09 |
| Employees | 19 | 7 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 0 | 0 |
| Health score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −34.0% (better) | −56.8% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 34.7% (better) | −18.4% |
| Operating margin | −82.6% | −37.4% (better) |
| Net margin | −88.5% | −39.4% (better) |
| Return on equity | −124% | – |
| Return on invested capital | −24.0% (better) | −53.4% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 3.28 | – |
| Interest coverage | −6.0× (better) | −15.8× |
| Current ratio | 1.04 (better) | 0.71 |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 16.2% | 0.77% |
| Held by insiders | 0.00% | 68.1% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | – | −$1.7M |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 2.5% |
Go deeper
- PBK stock overview
- PBK income statement
- PBK valuation and score
- PMA stock overview
- PMA income statement
- PMA valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.