Brady vs MSA Safety
BRC and MSA side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How BRC and MSA compare
MSA Safety is the larger company, worth 1.8 times as much as Brady ($6.8B against $3.9B).
On earnings, Brady is cheaper: it trades at 19.1× trailing earnings, against 21.9× for MSA Safety.
Brady grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (9.8% versus 6.5% for MSA Safety).
MSA Safety keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 16.1% compared with 12.4% at Brady.
Both pay dividends: Brady yields 1.2% and MSA Safety 1.2%.
MSA Safety scores higher on the StockData Score (17 against 13 for Brady), 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 | BRC | MSA |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $3.9B | $6.8B |
| Share price | $82.40 | $176.24 |
| Change, 1 year | 8.8% | 9.8% |
| Change, 5 years | 63.8% | 13.1% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.66 | 0.91 |
| Employees | 6,325 | 5,300 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 13 | 17 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 19.1× (better) | 21.9× |
| P/S | 2.3× (better) | 3.5× |
| P/B | 2.8× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 11.9× (better) | 14.7× |
| P/FCF | 20.1× | 19.2× (better) |
| PEG | – | 1.38 |
| FCF yield | 5.0% | 5.2% (better) |
| Fair value | $72.47 | $217.09 |
| Margin of safety | −13.7% | 18.8% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 9.8% (better) | 6.5% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 7.7% (better) | 6.8% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 8.5% | 13.4% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 9.7% | 14.7% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 17.6% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 51.7% (better) | 47.6% |
| Operating margin | 15.9% | 21.2% (better) |
| Net margin | 12.4% | 16.1% (better) |
| FCF margin | 11.6% | 18.2% (better) |
| Return on equity | 16.1% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 19.1% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 0.82 |
| Interest coverage | 27.2× (better) | 12.7× |
| Current ratio | 1.94 | 3.24 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 7.39 (better) | 5.86 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.2% | 1.2% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 22.5% | 26.4% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 6 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 4.2% |
| Buyback yield | 1.1% | 1.9% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 2.3% | 3.1% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 79.5% | 91.4% |
| Held by insiders | 3.2% | 0.87% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$695K (better) | −$4.1M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 2 |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.9% | – |
Go deeper
- BRC stock overview
- BRC income statement
- BRC valuation and score
- MSA stock overview
- MSA income statement
- MSA valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.