ABM Industries vs Airbnb
ABM and ABNB side by side, both in business services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How ABM and ABNB compare
Airbnb is the larger company, worth 35 times as much as ABM Industries ($112B against $3.2B).
On earnings, ABM Industries is cheaper: it trades at 19.7× trailing earnings, against 34.8× for Airbnb.
Airbnb grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (16.7% versus 6.0% for ABM Industries).
Airbnb keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 23.0% compared with 1.8% at ABM Industries.
ABM Industries pays a dividend yielding 2.1%; Airbnb does not pay one.
Airbnb scores higher on the StockData Score (15 against 13 for ABM Industries), 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 | ABM | ABNB |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $3.2B | $112B |
| Share price | $54.64 | $186.78 |
| Change, 1 year | 29.2% | 53.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 15.3% | −4.9% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.88 | 1.48 |
| Employees | 113K | 8,200 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 13 | 15 (better) |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Growth score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Performance score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 2 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 19.7× (better) | 34.8× |
| P/S | 0.4× (better) | 8.0× |
| P/B | 1.8× (better) | 12.0× |
| EV/EBITDA | 11.2× (better) | 32.4× |
| P/FCF | 10.3× | – |
| FCF yield | 9.8% | – |
| Fair value | $60.15 | $142.38 |
| Margin of safety | 9.2% (better) | −31.2% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 6.0% | 16.7% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 7.9% | 29.4% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 43.6% (better) | 21.9% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 49.7% (better) | 27.6% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 12.0% | 83.1% (better) |
| Operating margin | 3.5% | 22.5% (better) |
| Net margin | 1.8% | 23.0% (better) |
| FCF margin | 3.4% | – |
| Return on equity | 9.2% | 35.8% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 7.2% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.99 | 0.25 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.83 (better) | −3.26 |
| Interest coverage | 3.0× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.42 | 1.73 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.81 | 5.58 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.1% | – |
| Payout ratio | 40.5% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 16 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 7.5% | – |
| Buyback yield | 5.3% (better) | 3.5% |
| Shareholder yield | 7.4% (better) | 3.5% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 101% | 60.5% |
| Held by insiders | 1.8% | 27.0% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$4.4M (better) | −$1.1B |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.3% | 3.0% |
Go deeper
- ABM stock overview
- ABM income statement
- ABM valuation and score
- ABNB stock overview
- ABNB income statement
- ABNB valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.