Diebold Nixdorf vs PAR Technology
DBD and PAR side by side, both in computer and office equipment. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How DBD and PAR compare
Diebold Nixdorf is the larger company, worth 2.1 times as much as PAR Technology ($1.9B against $921M).
PAR Technology grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (16.8% versus 6.3% for Diebold Nixdorf).
Diebold Nixdorf keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 2.0% compared with −12.2% at PAR Technology.
PAR Technology scores higher on the StockData Score (9 against 8 for Diebold Nixdorf), 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 | DBD | PAR |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $1.9B | $921M |
| Share price | $57.04 | $22.26 |
| Change, 1 year | −12.2% | −42.5% |
| Change, 5 years | – | −64.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.99 | 1.57 |
| Employees | 20K | 1,809 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 8 | 9 (better) |
| Valuation score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Growth score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Health score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 26.7× | – |
| P/S | 0.5× (better) | 1.8× |
| P/B | 2.0× | 1.1× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 8.0× (better) | 7095× |
| FCF yield | – | −0.23% |
| Fair value | $91.07 | $49.83 |
| Margin of safety | 37.4% | 55.3% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 6.3% | 16.8% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | −0.50% | 16.3% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 51.6% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 56.2% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 25.0% | 42.9% (better) |
| Operating margin | 5.4% (better) | −9.8% |
| Net margin | 2.0% (better) | −12.2% |
| FCF margin | – | −0.41% |
| Return on equity | 7.5% (better) | −7.6% |
| Return on invested capital | 8.1% (better) | −3.5% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.01 | 0.52 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.28 (better) | 1863.40 |
| Interest coverage | 2.2× (better) | −4.2× |
| Current ratio | 1.27 | 2.07 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.84 (better) | 0.91 |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 2 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Buyback yield | 10.8% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 10.8% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 116% | 116% |
| Held by insiders | 58.9% | 17.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$126M | $35.2M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 23.0% | 25.6% |
Go deeper
- DBD stock overview
- DBD income statement
- DBD valuation and score
- PAR stock overview
- PAR income statement
- PAR valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.