ReposiTrak vs Where Food Comes From
TRAK and WFCF side by side, both in computer programming, data processing, and other computer related services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How TRAK and WFCF compare
ReposiTrak is the larger company, worth 1.6 times as much as Where Food Comes From ($133M against $82.1M).
On earnings, ReposiTrak is cheaper: it trades at 18.8× trailing earnings, against 70.9× for Where Food Comes From.
ReposiTrak grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (3.0% versus −0.66% for Where Food Comes From).
ReposiTrak keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 32.5% compared with 4.4% at Where Food Comes From.
ReposiTrak pays a dividend yielding 1.1%; Where Food Comes From does not pay one.
ReposiTrak scores higher on the StockData Score (21 against 10 for Where Food Comes From), 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 | TRAK | WFCF |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $133M | $82.1M |
| Share price | $7.32 | $16.30 |
| Change, 1 year | −51.4% | 34.0% |
| Change, 5 years | 25.8% | 12.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.80 | 0.20 |
| Employees | 67 | 100 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 21 (better) | 10 |
| Valuation score | 6 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Health score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 18.8× (better) | 70.9× |
| P/S | 5.7× | 3.2× (better) |
| P/B | 2.5× (better) | 8.8× |
| EV/EBITDA | 12.5× (better) | 30.5× |
| P/FCF | 16.2× (better) | 44.4× |
| PEG | 1.44 | – |
| FCF yield | 6.2% (better) | 2.3% |
| Fair value | $10.42 | $8.31 |
| Margin of safety | 29.8% (better) | −96.3% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 3.0% (better) | −0.66% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 2.1% | 4.4% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 8.5% (better) | −58.3% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 11.4% (better) | −56.6% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 16.7% (better) | 6.4% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 85.8% (better) | 39.4% |
| Operating margin | 33.7% (better) | 7.4% |
| Net margin | 32.5% (better) | 4.4% |
| FCF margin | 35.2% (better) | 7.3% |
| Return on equity | 14.9% (better) | 11.5% |
| Return on invested capital | 26.7% (better) | 23.5% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.01 (better) | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −3.18 | – |
| Interest coverage | 204× | 935× (better) |
| Current ratio | 3.85 (better) | 1.74 |
| Altman Z-score | 10.46 | 13.57 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.1% | – |
| Payout ratio | 21.6% | – |
| Buyback yield | 1.3% | 2.7% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 2.4% | 2.7% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 36.7% | 11.6% |
| Held by insiders | 26.6% | 88.8% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$1.6M | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 8.9% | 2.1% |
Go deeper
- TRAK stock overview
- TRAK income statement
- TRAK valuation and score
- WFCF stock overview
- WFCF income statement
- WFCF valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.