RH vs Williams Sonoma
RH and WSM side by side, both in consumer discretionary. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How RH and WSM compare
Williams Sonoma is the larger company, worth 11 times as much as RH ($29.8B against $2.8B).
On earnings, Williams Sonoma is cheaper: it trades at 25.9× trailing earnings, against 26.1× for RH.
RH grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (3.3% versus 2.2% for Williams Sonoma).
Williams Sonoma keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 14.7% compared with 3.2% at RH.
Williams Sonoma pays a dividend yielding 1.2%; RH does not pay one.
Williams Sonoma scores higher on the StockData Score (18 against 12 for RH), 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 | RH | WSM |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $2.8B | $29.8B |
| Share price | $146.66 | $252.72 |
| Change, 1 year | −20.4% | 29.3% |
| Change, 5 years | −77.8% | 144% |
| Beta (5Y) | 2.21 | 1.42 |
| Employees | 6,500 | 20K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 12 | 18 (better) |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 2 | 6 (better) |
| Health score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 26.1× | 25.9× (better) |
| P/S | 0.8× (better) | 3.7× |
| P/B | 23.1× | 13.9× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 5.3× (better) | 16.2× |
| P/FCF | 11.1× (better) | 22.2× |
| PEG | – | 9.57 |
| FCF yield | 9.0% (better) | 4.5% |
| Fair value | $175.24 | $153.08 |
| Margin of safety | 16.3% (better) | −65.1% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 3.3% (better) | 2.2% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 3.8% (better) | 2.9% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 4.4% | 4.6% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 4.7% | 8.6% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −8.7% | 15.5% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 44.3% | 47.2% (better) |
| Operating margin | 10.0% | 19.2% (better) |
| Net margin | 3.2% | 14.7% (better) |
| FCF margin | 7.3% | 16.8% (better) |
| Return on equity | 281% (better) | 55.0% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 101% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Current ratio | 1.12 | 1.45 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.16 | 8.28 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 1.2% |
| Payout ratio | – | 28.5% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 15 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 21.2% |
| Buyback yield | – | 2.9% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 4.0% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 105% | 96.1% |
| Held by insiders | 27.1% | 1.1% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$24.6M (better) | −$49.4M |
| Short interest, % of float | 38.3% | 4.7% |
Go deeper
- RH stock overview
- RH income statement
- RH valuation and score
- WSM stock overview
- WSM income statement
- WSM valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.