WF vs J-Star
WFF and YMAT side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How WFF and YMAT compare
WF grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (61.9% versus −43.5% for J-Star).
WF scores higher on the StockData Score (4 against 2 for J-Star), 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 | WFF | YMAT |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Share price | $1.12 | $1.30 |
| Change, 1 year | −64.2% | −68.7% |
| Beta (5Y) | – | 3.80 |
| Employees | 142 | 19 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 0 | 0 |
| Health score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 61.9% (better) | −43.5% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −4374% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −4133% | −1857% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 31.9% | 54.1% (better) |
| Operating margin | −20.5% (better) | −208% |
| Net margin | −64.4% | – |
| FCF margin | −36.7% | −33.9% (better) |
| Return on equity | −83.9% | – |
| Return on invested capital | −26.0% (better) | −88.0% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.02 (better) | 4.13 |
| Interest coverage | −90.8× | −55.2× (better) |
| Current ratio | 4.99 (better) | 1.26 |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | – |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by insiders | 37.9% | 51.8% |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.0% | 3.1% |
Go deeper
- WFF stock overview
- WFF income statement
- WFF valuation and score
- YMAT stock overview
- YMAT income statement
- YMAT valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.