Peabody Energy vs NACCO Industries
BTU and NC side by side, both in energy. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How BTU and NC compare
Peabody Energy is the larger company, worth 8.1 times as much as NACCO Industries ($2.1B against $261M).
Peabody Energy grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (3.4% versus 0.54% for NACCO Industries).
Both pay dividends: Peabody Energy yields 1.3% and NACCO Industries 3.0%.
NACCO Industries scores higher on the StockData Score (10 against 8 for Peabody Energy), 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 | BTU | NC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $2.1B | $261M |
| Share price | $17.41 | $34.61 |
| Change, 1 year | −42.7% | −31.2% |
| Change, 5 years | 76.4% | 13.0% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.69 | 0.60 |
| Employees | 5,400 | 1,700 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 8 | 10 (better) |
| Valuation score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 1 | 1 |
| Performance score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Health score | 4 | 4 |
| Dividend score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 17.6× |
| P/S | 0.5× (better) | 0.9× |
| P/B | 0.7× | 0.6× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 8.8× | 4.3× (better) |
| Fair value | $19.44 | $34.27 |
| Margin of safety | 10.5% (better) | −0.99% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 3.4% (better) | 0.54% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 6.0% | 16.6% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | −48.4% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | −49.4% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 2.3% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | – | 18.9% |
| Operating margin | −4.5% | 9.1% (better) |
| Net margin | – | 5.3% |
| Return on equity | – | 3.4% |
| Return on invested capital | −5.2% | 5.1% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.09 | 0.02 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.60 | −0.97 |
| Interest coverage | −3.5× | 4.0× (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.84 | 3.16 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.72 | 2.19 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | – | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.3% | 3.0% (better) |
| Payout ratio | – | 51.8% |
| Years of dividend growth | 1 | 7 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 5.1% |
| Buyback yield | – | 0.70% |
| Shareholder yield | 1.3% | 3.7% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 91.8% | 28.2% |
| Held by insiders | 0.86% | 31.5% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$1.8M | −$383K (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 9.1% | 1.7% |
Go deeper
- BTU stock overview
- BTU income statement
- BTU valuation and score
- NC stock overview
- NC income statement
- NC valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.