Franklin Covey vs Mastech Digital
FC and MHH side by side, both in management and public relations services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How FC and MHH compare
Franklin Covey is the larger company, worth 2.3 times as much as Mastech Digital ($171M against $74.7M).
On earnings, Mastech Digital is cheaper: it trades at 69.0× trailing earnings, against 94.4× for Franklin Covey.
Franklin Covey grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (−6.1% versus −13.6% for Mastech Digital).
Franklin Covey keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 0.83% compared with 0.67% at Mastech Digital.
Mastech Digital scores higher on the StockData Score (13 against 8 for Franklin Covey), 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 | FC | MHH |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $171M | $74.7M |
| Share price | $15.10 | $6.21 |
| Change, 1 year | 1.3% | −13.8% |
| Change, 5 years | −68.5% | −66.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.98 | 0.83 |
| Employees | 1,120 | 11 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 8 | 13 (better) |
| Valuation score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Growth score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Performance score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Health score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 94.4× | 69.0× (better) |
| P/S | 0.6× | 0.4× (better) |
| P/B | 4.0× | 0.8× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 24.6× | 9.2× (better) |
| P/FCF | 8.8× (better) | 13.1× |
| FCF yield | 11.3% (better) | 7.7% |
| Fair value | $17.85 | $8.95 |
| Margin of safety | 15.4% | 30.6% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −6.1% (better) | −13.6% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 6.1% (better) | −2.9% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −79.5% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −79.7% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | −43.0% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 75.2% (better) | 28.2% |
| Operating margin | 2.4% (better) | 0.44% |
| Net margin | 0.83% (better) | 0.67% |
| FCF margin | 7.3% (better) | 3.4% |
| Return on equity | 4.0% (better) | 1.3% |
| Return on invested capital | 10.2% (better) | 0.68% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Interest coverage | 19.1× | – |
| Current ratio | 0.66 | 4.27 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.68 | 5.33 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Buyback yield | 18.5% (better) | −0.07% |
| Shareholder yield | 18.5% (better) | −0.07% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 72.6% | 19.2% |
| Held by insiders | 44.7% | 11.8% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $0 | $259K (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 13.3% | 0.37% |
Go deeper
- FC stock overview
- FC income statement
- FC valuation and score
- MHH stock overview
- MHH income statement
- MHH valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.