Solaris Energy Infrastructure vs Cactus
SEI and WHD 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 SEI and WHD compare
Solaris Energy Infrastructure and Cactus are about the same size, with market caps of $5.0B and $4.9B.
Solaris Energy Infrastructure grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (73.8% versus 40.4% for Cactus).
Cactus keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 12.0% compared with 8.0% at Solaris Energy Infrastructure.
Both pay dividends: Solaris Energy Infrastructure yields 0.74% and Cactus 0.93%.
Cactus scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 12 for Solaris Energy Infrastructure), 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 | SEI | WHD |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $5.0B | $4.9B |
| Share price | $64.80 | $61.47 |
| Change, 1 year | 28.7% | 41.7% |
| Change, 5 years | 879% | 62.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.42 | 1.19 |
| Employees | 468 | 1,500 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 12 | 16 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 3 | 3 |
| Performance score | 4 | 4 |
| Health score | 2 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/S | 5.3× | 3.2× (better) |
| P/B | 3.9× | 3.8× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 18.7× | 11.9× (better) |
| FCF yield | −21.4% | – |
| Fair value | $31.65 | $47.74 |
| Margin of safety | −105% | −28.8% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 73.8% (better) | 40.4% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 43.3% (better) | 25.4% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 96.6% (better) | 6.4% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | – | 33.5% |
| Operating margin | 22.8% (better) | 18.8% |
| Net margin | 8.0% | 12.0% (better) |
| FCF margin | −114% | – |
| Return on equity | 8.2% | 14.7% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 10.5% | 26.0% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.35 (better) | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.73 | – |
| Interest coverage | 4.4× | – |
| Current ratio | 2.10 | 3.06 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.36 | 5.41 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.74% | 0.93% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 38.9% | 21.8% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 2.7% | 8.4% (better) |
| Buyback yield | – | 0.16% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.74% | 1.1% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 92.8% | 95.7% |
| Held by insiders | 34.1% | 14.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$299M | −$90.1M (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 33.3% | 4.3% |
Go deeper
- SEI stock overview
- SEI income statement
- SEI valuation and score
- WHD stock overview
- WHD income statement
- WHD valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.