Boise Cascade vs Builders FirstSource
BCC and BLDR side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How BCC and BLDR compare
Builders FirstSource is the larger company, worth 2.8 times as much as Boise Cascade ($6.5B against $2.4B).
On earnings, Boise Cascade is cheaper: it trades at 19.8× trailing earnings, against 164× for Builders FirstSource.
Boise Cascade grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (1.2% versus −8.3% for Builders FirstSource).
Boise Cascade keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 1.8% compared with 0.28% at Builders FirstSource.
Boise Cascade pays a dividend yielding 1.3%; Builders FirstSource does not pay one.
Boise Cascade scores higher on the StockData Score (13 against 5 for Builders FirstSource), 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 | BCC | BLDR |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $2.4B | $6.5B |
| Share price | $67.39 | $60.68 |
| Change, 1 year | −4.1% | −43.0% |
| Change, 5 years | −6.3% | −13.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.97 | 1.31 |
| Employees | 7,680 | 28K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 13 (better) | 5 |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Growth score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 19.8× (better) | 164× |
| P/S | 0.4× (better) | 0.5× |
| P/B | 1.1× (better) | 1.6× |
| EV/EBITDA | 6.9× (better) | 12.3× |
| P/FCF | 17.7× (better) | 26.0× |
| FCF yield | 5.7% (better) | 3.8% |
| Fair value | $77.05 | $71.46 |
| Margin of safety | 12.5% | 15.1% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 1.2% (better) | −8.3% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 3.2% | 12.2% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −37.7% (better) | −93.2% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −32.6% (better) | −93.0% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −4.5% | 7.9% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 16.7% | 28.5% (better) |
| Operating margin | 2.8% (better) | 2.1% |
| Net margin | 1.8% (better) | 0.28% |
| FCF margin | 2.0% (better) | 1.7% |
| Return on equity | 5.7% (better) | 0.97% |
| Return on invested capital | 6.3% (better) | 3.6% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.22 (better) | 1.13 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.18 (better) | 5.05 |
| Interest coverage | 7.0× | – |
| Current ratio | 2.82 (better) | 1.85 |
| Altman Z-score | 4.17 (better) | 2.06 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.3% | – |
| Payout ratio | 28.4% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | −15.5% | – |
| Buyback yield | 7.9% (better) | 4.6% |
| Shareholder yield | 9.2% (better) | 4.6% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 97.4% | 100% |
| Held by insiders | 1.6% | 16.5% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$666K | $4.0M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 6 (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 4.2% | 9.8% |
Go deeper
- BCC stock overview
- BCC income statement
- BCC valuation and score
- BLDR stock overview
- BLDR income statement
- BLDR valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.