Crown vs Silgan
CCK and SLGN side by side, both in fabricated metal products, except machinery and transportation equipment. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CCK and SLGN compare
Crown is the larger company, worth 3.0 times as much as Silgan ($13.1B against $4.3B).
On earnings, Silgan is cheaper: it trades at 16.5× trailing earnings, against 16.9× for Crown.
Crown grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (13.4% versus 4.5% for Silgan).
Crown keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 5.8% compared with 3.9% at Silgan.
Both pay dividends: Crown yields 0.86% and Silgan 2.0%.
Crown scores higher on the StockData Score (18 against 12 for Silgan), 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 | CCK | SLGN |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $13.1B | $4.3B |
| Share price | $121.57 | $40.90 |
| Change, 1 year | 23.2% | 7.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 9.0% | −3.1% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.64 | 0.65 |
| Employees | 23K | 13K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 18 (better) | 12 |
| Valuation score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 1 |
| Health score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 4 | 4 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 16.9× | 16.5× (better) |
| P/S | 1.0× | 0.6× (better) |
| P/B | 4.5× | 1.7× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 11.5× | 9.5× (better) |
| P/FCF | 13.0× | 12.5× (better) |
| PEG | 7.97 | – |
| FCF yield | 7.7% | 8.0% (better) |
| Fair value | $138.82 | $51.83 |
| Margin of safety | 12.4% | 21.1% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 13.4% (better) | 4.5% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 5.7% | 5.7% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −16.0% (better) | −16.9% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −11.1% (better) | −15.6% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 8.2% (better) | −0.51% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 20.2% (better) | 17.0% |
| Operating margin | 12.0% | – |
| Net margin | 5.8% (better) | 3.9% |
| FCF margin | 7.3% (better) | 5.2% |
| Return on equity | 26.7% (better) | 11.0% |
| Return on invested capital | 15.1% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.99 | 1.84 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.18 (better) | 4.68 |
| Interest coverage | 4.2× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.14 | 1.35 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.07 (better) | 1.76 |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 7 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.86% | 2.0% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 18.2% | 33.7% |
| Years of dividend growth | 4 | 16 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 10.8% |
| Buyback yield | 6.0% (better) | 0.38% |
| Shareholder yield | 6.9% (better) | 2.4% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 100.0% | 92.5% |
| Held by insiders | 0.97% | 1.8% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$16.5M | $0 (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 3 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.1% | 9.1% |
Go deeper
- CCK stock overview
- CCK income statement
- CCK valuation and score
- SLGN stock overview
- SLGN income statement
- SLGN valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.