DANA vs Thor Industries
DAN and THO side by side, both in motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How DAN and THO compare
Thor Industries is the larger company, worth 1.6 times as much as DANA ($4.0B against $2.5B).
On earnings, DANA is cheaper: it trades at 2.4× trailing earnings, against 23.2× for Thor Industries.
DANA grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (5.1% versus 0.30% for Thor Industries).
DANA keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 13.5% compared with 1.8% at Thor Industries.
Both pay dividends: DANA yields 1.6% and Thor Industries 2.0%.
DANA scores higher on the StockData Score (15 against 10 for Thor 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 | DAN | THO |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $2.5B | $4.0B |
| Share price | $23.19 | $78.36 |
| Change, 1 year | 8.4% | −23.2% |
| Change, 5 years | −1.8% | −29.0% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.44 | 1.23 |
| Employees | 27K | 20K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 15 (better) | 10 |
| Valuation score | 4 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Health score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 2.4× (better) | 23.2× |
| P/S | 0.3× (better) | 0.4× |
| P/B | 1.5× | 0.9× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 15.3× | 8.0× (better) |
| P/FCF | 28.7× | – |
| FCF yield | 3.5% | – |
| Fair value | $19.85 | $72.10 |
| Margin of safety | −16.8% | −8.7% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 5.1% (better) | 0.30% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 1.1% (better) | −4.8% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 1804% (better) | −31.3% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 2022% (better) | −30.2% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | −22.2% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 9.8% | 12.6% (better) |
| Operating margin | 3.2% | – |
| Net margin | 13.5% (better) | 1.8% |
| FCF margin | 1.1% | – |
| Return on equity | 74.5% (better) | 4.2% |
| Return on invested capital | 3.6% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.92 | 0.20 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 5.04 | 0.70 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 2.2× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.13 | 1.77 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.13 | 3.39 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.6% | 2.0% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 4.9% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 9 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 32.0% (better) | 4.9% |
| Buyback yield | 23.2% (better) | 2.8% |
| Shareholder yield | 24.8% (better) | 4.8% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 99.8% | 107% |
| Held by insiders | 1.6% | 14.3% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $0 (better) | −$473K |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 2 |
| Short interest, % of float | 4.1% | 10.9% |
Go deeper
- DAN stock overview
- DAN income statement
- DAN valuation and score
- THO stock overview
- THO income statement
- THO valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.