DNOW vs TechnipFMC
DNOW and FTI side by side, both in construction, mining, and materials handling. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How DNOW and FTI compare
TechnipFMC is the larger company, worth 10 times as much as DNOW ($25.2B against $2.5B).
DNOW grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (96.8% versus 9.1% for TechnipFMC).
TechnipFMC keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 12.0% compared with −3.9% at DNOW.
TechnipFMC pays a dividend yielding 0.31%; DNOW does not pay one.
TechnipFMC scores higher on the StockData Score (18 against 8 for DNOW), 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 | DNOW | FTI |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $2.5B | $25.2B |
| Share price | $13.90 | $64.92 |
| Change, 1 year | 7.3% | 49.1% |
| Change, 5 years | 49.5% | 942% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.88 | 0.89 |
| Employees | 5,300 | 37K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 8 | 18 (better) |
| Valuation score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Growth score | 1 | 1 |
| Performance score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 20.4× |
| P/S | 0.5× (better) | 2.4× |
| P/B | 1.2× (better) | 7.6× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 11.2× |
| P/FCF | 12.4× (better) | 15.8× |
| FCF yield | 8.1% (better) | 6.3% |
| Fair value | $15.56 | $79.14 |
| Margin of safety | 10.6% | 18.0% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 96.8% (better) | 9.1% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 11.7% (better) | 8.7% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −338% | 35.8% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 42.0% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 16.1% | – |
| Operating margin | −3.9% | 16.8% (better) |
| Net margin | −3.9% | 12.0% (better) |
| FCF margin | 4.2% | 14.9% (better) |
| Return on equity | −11.3% | 38.6% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | −10.1% | 50.6% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.12 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | −0.29 |
| Interest coverage | – | 30.9× |
| Current ratio | 2.08 (better) | 1.09 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.08 | 3.31 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 8 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 0.31% |
| Payout ratio | – | 6.2% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 9.0% |
| Buyback yield | 4.1% | 4.6% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 4.1% | 5.0% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 107% | 99.3% |
| Held by insiders | 1.9% | 1.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$7.5M (better) | −$77.1M |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 6.5% | 3.6% |
Go deeper
- DNOW stock overview
- DNOW income statement
- DNOW valuation and score
- FTI stock overview
- FTI income statement
- FTI valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.