Manitowoc vs Terex
MTW and TEX side by side, both in construction, mining, and materials handling. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How MTW and TEX compare
Terex is the larger company, worth 7.4 times as much as Manitowoc ($6.5B against $879M).
On earnings, Terex is cheaper: it trades at 29.1× trailing earnings, against 34.3× for Manitowoc.
Terex grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (40.1% versus 10.2% for Manitowoc).
Terex keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 2.6% compared with 1.1% at Manitowoc.
Terex pays a dividend yielding 0.89%; Manitowoc does not pay one.
Terex scores higher on the StockData Score (9 against 5 for Manitowoc), 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 | MTW | TEX |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $879M | $6.5B |
| Share price | $24.38 | $57.56 |
| Change, 1 year | 120% | 28.8% |
| Change, 5 years | 21.6% | 24.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.42 | 1.36 |
| Employees | 4,700 | 11K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 5 | 9 (better) |
| Valuation score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Performance score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Health score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 34.3× | 29.1× (better) |
| P/S | 0.4× (better) | 0.9× |
| P/B | 1.2× (better) | 1.3× |
| EV/EBITDA | 8.9× (better) | 12.0× |
| P/FCF | 17.8× | – |
| FCF yield | 5.6% | – |
| Fair value | $23.42 | $41.43 |
| Margin of safety | −4.1% (better) | −38.9% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 10.2% | 40.1% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.2% | 12.0% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −54.0% | 26.9% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −53.6% | −15.7% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 19.1% (better) | 17.1% |
| Operating margin | 3.6% | 5.7% (better) |
| Net margin | 1.1% | 2.6% (better) |
| FCF margin | 2.1% | – |
| Return on equity | 3.8% | 5.7% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 4.6% | 6.4% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.67 | 0.52 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.83 (better) | 3.02 |
| Interest coverage | – | 2.2× |
| Current ratio | 2.11 (better) | 1.76 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.37 (better) | 2.06 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 0.89% |
| Payout ratio | 0.00% | 34.8% |
| Buyback yield | – | 1.2% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 2.1% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 83.9% | 104% |
| Held by insiders | 5.6% | 1.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$106K (better) | −$2.4M |
| Short interest, % of float | 5.1% | 7.6% |
Go deeper
- MTW stock overview
- MTW income statement
- MTW valuation and score
- TEX stock overview
- TEX income statement
- TEX valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.