Knife River vs Martin Marietta Materials
KNF and MLM side by side, both in mining & quarrying of nonmetallic minerals (no fuels). Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How KNF and MLM compare
Martin Marietta Materials is the larger company, worth 9.5 times as much as Knife River ($31.5B against $3.3B).
On earnings, Martin Marietta Materials is cheaper: it trades at 13.9× trailing earnings, against 23.8× for Knife River.
Martin Marietta Materials grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (19.6% versus 12.1% for Knife River).
Martin Marietta Materials keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 31.9% compared with 4.2% at Knife River.
Martin Marietta Materials pays a dividend yielding 0.64%; Knife River does not pay one.
Martin Marietta Materials scores higher on the StockData Score (17 against 8 for Knife River), 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 | KNF | MLM |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $3.3B | $31.5B |
| Share price | $58.33 | $524.13 |
| Change, 1 year | −18.8% | −15.0% |
| Change, 5 years | – | 25.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.04 | 0.90 |
| Employees | 5,298 | 9,600 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 8 | 17 (better) |
| Valuation score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Growth score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Performance score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 1 | 1 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 23.8× | 13.9× (better) |
| P/S | 1.0× (better) | 4.4× |
| P/B | 2.1× | 1.8× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 10.0× (better) | 21.2× |
| P/FCF | 76.9× | 36.0× (better) |
| PEG | 2.28 | 1.31 (better) |
| FCF yield | 1.3% | 2.8% (better) |
| Fair value | $55.13 | $597.39 |
| Margin of safety | −5.8% | 12.3% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 12.1% | 19.6% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | – | 5.4% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −8.7% | 99.6% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −8.9% | 99.3% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 10.2% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 17.8% | 26.7% (better) |
| Operating margin | 8.3% | 18.2% (better) |
| Net margin | 4.2% | 31.9% (better) |
| FCF margin | 1.3% | 12.1% (better) |
| Return on equity | 9.1% | 16.8% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 6.8% (better) | 4.6% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.01 | 0.73 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.23 (better) | 6.08 |
| Interest coverage | 3.1× | 4.2× (better) |
| Current ratio | 2.66 (better) | 1.63 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.34 (better) | 1.62 |
| Piotroski F-score | 3 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 0.64% |
| Payout ratio | – | 9.2% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 8 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 7.7% |
| Buyback yield | – | 0.64% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 1.3% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 96.7% | 98.7% |
| Held by insiders | 0.70% | 19.1% |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 4 |
| Short interest, % of float | 7.2% | 6.9% |
Go deeper
- KNF stock overview
- KNF income statement
- KNF valuation and score
- MLM stock overview
- MLM income statement
- MLM valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.