Comfort Systems USA vs Legence
FIX and LGN side by side, both in construction special trade contractors. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How FIX and LGN compare
Comfort Systems USA is the larger company, worth 10 times as much as Legence ($40.6B against $4.0B).
Legence grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (69.2% versus 50.7% for Comfort Systems USA).
Comfort Systems USA keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 13.0% compared with −1.2% at Legence.
Comfort Systems USA pays a dividend yielding 0.26%; Legence does not pay one.
Comfort Systems USA scores higher on the StockData Score (19 against 6 for Legence), 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 | FIX | LGN |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $40.6B | $4.0B |
| Share price | $1161.63 | $37.09 |
| Change, 1 year | 19.2% | 1.4% |
| Change, 5 years | 1041% | – |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.45 | 2.80 |
| Employees | 23K | 7,000 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 19 (better) | 6 |
| Valuation score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 2 |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 25.1× | – |
| P/S | 3.2× | 1.1× (better) |
| P/B | 12.2× | 6.7× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 38.9× | 33.5× (better) |
| P/FCF | 16.6× | 12.4× (better) |
| PEG | 0.41 | – |
| FCF yield | 6.0% | 8.1% (better) |
| Fair value | $801.15 | $9.55 |
| Margin of safety | −45.0% (better) | −288% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 50.7% | 69.2% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | −8.5% | – |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 94.8% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 96.1% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 47.8% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 11.3% | 18.7% (better) |
| Operating margin | 7.9% (better) | 0.79% |
| Net margin | 13.0% (better) | −1.2% |
| FCF margin | 19.5% (better) | 8.6% |
| Return on equity | 58.6% (better) | −7.5% |
| Return on invested capital | 38.9% (better) | 1.7% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.01 (better) | 1.72 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −2.13 | 4.85 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 125× (better) | 0.4× |
| Current ratio | 1.15 | 1.35 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 6.03 (better) | 1.91 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.26% | – |
| Payout ratio | 6.5% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 13 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 35.6% | – |
| Buyback yield | 1.1% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 1.3% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 93.3% | 79.0% |
| Held by insiders | 1.1% | 47.1% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$165M (better) | −$2.5B |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.5% | 4.5% |
Go deeper
- FIX stock overview
- FIX income statement
- FIX valuation and score
- LGN stock overview
- LGN income statement
- LGN valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.