Lennar vs Toll Brothers
LEN and TOL side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How LEN and TOL compare
Lennar is the larger company, worth 1.5 times as much as Toll Brothers ($20.5B against $13.6B).
On earnings, Toll Brothers is cheaper: it trades at 11.9× trailing earnings, against 16.3× for Lennar.
Toll Brothers grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (−1.1% versus −8.0% for Lennar).
Toll Brothers keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 11.1% compared with 4.1% at Lennar.
Both pay dividends: Lennar yields 2.3% and Toll Brothers 0.70%.
Toll Brothers scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 9 for Lennar), 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 | LEN | TOL |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $20.5B | $13.6B |
| Share price | $86.33 | $147.99 |
| Change, 1 year | −29.9% | 9.1% |
| Change, 5 years | −22.5% | 124% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.00 | 1.08 |
| Employees | 13K | 4,900 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 9 | 16 (better) |
| Valuation score | 1 | 1 |
| Growth score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Performance score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 16.3× | 11.9× (better) |
| P/S | 0.6× (better) | 1.3× |
| P/B | 0.9× (better) | 1.6× |
| EV/EBITDA | 9.6× | 8.0× (better) |
| P/FCF | 25.3× | 12.5× (better) |
| PEG | – | 1.61 |
| FCF yield | 4.0% | 8.0% (better) |
| Fair value | $77.05 | $127.80 |
| Margin of safety | −12.0% (better) | −15.8% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −8.0% | −1.1% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 8.7% | 9.2% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −51.3% | −12.9% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −47.7% | −8.4% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 31.7% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | – | 23.7% |
| Operating margin | – | 13.8% |
| Net margin | 4.1% | 11.1% (better) |
| FCF margin | 2.5% | 10.1% (better) |
| Return on equity | 5.9% | 14.4% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | – | 16.0% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.93 | 3.28 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.3% (better) | 0.70% |
| Payout ratio | 37.6% | 8.1% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 5 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 17.4% |
| Buyback yield | 4.8% | 5.0% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 7.2% (better) | 5.7% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 92.8% | 94.0% |
| Held by insiders | 11.2% | 0.74% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $595M (better) | −$26.1M |
| Superinvestors holding | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 4.4% |
Go deeper
- LEN stock overview
- LEN income statement
- LEN valuation and score
- TOL stock overview
- TOL income statement
- TOL valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.