Ennis vs LSI Industries
EBF and LYTS side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How EBF and LYTS compare
Ennis and LSI Industries are about the same size, with market caps of $534M and $595M.
On earnings, Ennis is cheaper: it trades at 13.8× trailing earnings, against 25.3× for LSI Industries.
LSI Industries grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (27.9% versus 2.3% for Ennis).
Ennis keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 9.8% compared with 3.0% at LSI Industries.
Both pay dividends: Ennis yields 4.8% and LSI Industries 1.3%.
Ennis scores higher on the StockData Score (20 against 13 for LSI 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 | EBF | LYTS |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $534M | $595M |
| Share price | $21.08 | $15.96 |
| Change, 1 year | 23.9% | −16.9% |
| Change, 5 years | 8.8% | 111% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.41 | 0.66 |
| Employees | 1,835 | 3,000 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 20 (better) | 13 |
| Valuation score | 3 | 3 |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 13.8× (better) | 25.3× |
| P/S | 1.3× | 0.8× (better) |
| P/B | 1.7× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 8.9× (better) | 13.4× |
| P/FCF | 9.3× (better) | 11.2× |
| FCF yield | 10.8% (better) | 8.9% |
| Fair value | $23.83 | $17.20 |
| Margin of safety | 11.5% (better) | 7.2% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 2.3% | 27.9% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 1.9% | 16.9% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −7.7% (better) | −10.1% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −6.1% (better) | −21.3% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 12.3% | 26.1% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 30.6% (better) | 24.4% |
| Operating margin | 13.6% (better) | 5.5% |
| Net margin | 9.8% (better) | 3.0% |
| FCF margin | 14.5% (better) | 7.0% |
| Return on equity | 12.6% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 14.7% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 3.70 |
| Interest coverage | – | 4.6× |
| Current ratio | 3.79 (better) | 2.00 |
| Altman Z-score | 9.02 (better) | 2.27 |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 4.8% (better) | 1.3% |
| Payout ratio | 65.7% | 30.7% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 2.1% (better) | 0.00% |
| Buyback yield | 1.1% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 5.9% (better) | 1.3% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 85.4% | 90.1% |
| Held by insiders | 1.2% | 2.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $0 (better) | −$8.4M |
| Short interest, % of float | 7.4% | 9.6% |
Go deeper
- EBF stock overview
- EBF income statement
- EBF valuation and score
- LYTS stock overview
- LYTS income statement
- LYTS valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.