Specialty Business Services
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
ABM vs SCI vs ACCO vs CTAS vs KELYA
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Personal Products & Services
Business Equipment & Supplies
Specialty Business Services
Staffing & Employment Services
ABM vs SCI vs ACCO vs CTAS vs KELYA — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Specialty Business Services | Personal Products & Services | Business Equipment & Supplies | Specialty Business Services | Staffing & Employment Services |
| Market Cap | $2.36B | $10.78B | $373M | $67.28B | $355M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $8.87B | $4.33B | $1.55B | $10.79B | $3.09B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $158M | $626M | $74M | $1.90B | $-266M |
| Gross Margin | 11.5% | 26.2% | 30.7% | 50.2% | 26.3% |
| Operating Margin | 3.7% | 22.4% | 7.9% | 23.0% | -2.8% |
| Forward P/E | 10.2x | 18.8x | 4.6x | 34.1x | 11.2x |
| Total Debt | $1.69B | $5.14B | $921M | $2.65B | $159M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $104M | $244M | $64M | $264M | $33M |
ABM vs SCI vs ACCO vs CTAS vs KELYA — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| ABM Industries Inco… (ABM) | 100 | 130.8 | +30.8% |
| Service Corporation… (SCI) | 100 | 197.1 | +97.1% |
| ACCO Brands Corpora… (ACCO) | 100 | 65.3 | -34.7% |
| Cintas Corporation (CTAS) | 100 | 269.3 | +169.3% |
| Kelly Services, Inc. (KELYA) | 100 | 65.8 | -34.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ABM vs SCI vs ACCO vs CTAS vs KELYA
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ABM ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and valuation efficiency.
- Dividend streak 36 yrs, beta 0.71, yield 2.6%
- PEG 0.04 vs SCI's 3.30
- Lower P/E (10.2x vs 34.1x), PEG 0.04 vs 2.04
SCI is the clearest fit if your priority is stability.
- Beta 0.12 vs ACCO's 1.35
ACCO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if dividends and momentum is your priority.
- 7.1% yield, vs ABM's 2.6%
- +16.7% vs CTAS's -21.5%
CTAS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 7.7%, EPS growth 16.1%, 3Y rev CAGR 9.6%
- 6.7% 10Y total return vs SCI's 222.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.51, Low D/E 56.7%, current ratio 2.09x
- Beta 0.51, yield 0.9%, current ratio 2.09x
Among these 5 stocks, KELYA doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 7.7% revenue growth vs ACCO's -8.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (10.2x vs 34.1x), PEG 0.04 vs 2.04 | |
| Quality / Margins | 17.6% margin vs KELYA's -8.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.12 vs ACCO's 1.35 | |
| Dividends | 7.1% yield, vs ABM's 2.6% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +16.7% vs CTAS's -21.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 18.7% ROA vs KELYA's -11.3%, ROIC 25.8% vs -4.0% |
ABM vs SCI vs ACCO vs CTAS vs KELYA — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
ABM vs SCI vs ACCO vs CTAS vs KELYA — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CTAS leads in 3 of 6 categories
KELYA leads 1 • ABM leads 0 • SCI leads 0 • ACCO leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CTAS leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CTAS is the larger business by revenue, generating $10.8B annually — 7.0x ACCO's $1.6B. CTAS is the more profitable business, keeping 17.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to KELYA's -8.6%. On growth, CTAS holds the edge at +9.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $8.9B | $4.3B | $1.6B | $10.8B | $3.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $431M | $1.2B | $177M | $2.9B | -$54M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $158M | $626M | $74M | $1.9B | -$266M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $327M | $629M | $49M | $1.8B | $66M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +11.5% | +26.2% | +30.7% | +50.2% | +26.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +3.7% | +22.4% | +7.9% | +23.0% | -2.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +1.8% | +14.5% | +4.8% | +17.6% | -8.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +3.7% | +14.5% | +3.2% | +16.5% | +2.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +6.1% | +2.1% | +8.3% | +9.3% | -100.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -7.2% | +65.3% | +2.4% | +11.0% | -2.1% |
Valuation Metrics
KELYA leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 9.2x trailing earnings, ACCO trades at a 76% valuation discount to CTAS's 37.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), ABM offers better value at 0.05x vs SCI's 3.59x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.4B | $10.8B | $373M | $67.3B | $355M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $3.9B | $15.7B | $1.2B | $69.7B | $481M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 15.52x | 20.45x | 9.18x | 37.95x | -1.36x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 10.15x | 18.83x | 4.64x | 34.12x | 11.15x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.05x | 3.59x | — | 2.27x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 9.16x | 11.93x | 6.79x | 24.41x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.27x | 2.50x | 0.24x | 6.51x | 0.08x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.41x | 6.77x | 0.57x | 14.62x | 0.35x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 15.19x | 19.45x | 7.34x | 38.29x | 3.11x |
Profitability & Efficiency
CTAS leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CTAS delivers a 42.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $43 in annual profit, vs $-25 for KELYA. KELYA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.16x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to SCI's 3.14x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CTAS scores 9/9 vs KELYA's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +8.8% | +39.4% | +11.3% | +42.6% | -24.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +3.0% | +3.4% | +3.2% | +18.7% | -11.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.5% | +11.3% | +5.5% | +25.8% | -4.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +8.2% | +5.6% | +6.1% | +29.8% | -4.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 9 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.95x | 3.14x | 1.39x | 0.57x | 0.16x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.6B | $4.9B | $856M | $2.4B | $126M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $104M | $244M | $64M | $264M | $33M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.7B | $5.1B | $921M | $2.7B | $159M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 3.25x | 3.78x | 2.50x | 24.61x | -12.07x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CTAS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CTAS five years ago would be worth $19,239 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $4,269 for KELYA. Over the past 12 months, ACCO leads with a +16.7% total return vs CTAS's -21.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CTAS at 14.2% vs KELYA's -12.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -4.5% | +1.1% | +11.5% | -9.4% | +15.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -18.6% | +4.7% | +16.7% | -21.5% | -18.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +2.0% | +24.2% | -4.8% | +49.1% | -33.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -14.5% | +48.9% | -39.3% | +92.4% | -57.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +47.0% | +222.7% | -35.3% | +671.6% | -32.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +0.7% | +7.5% | -1.6% | +14.2% | -12.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — SCI and ACCO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
SCI is the less volatile stock with a 0.12 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ACCO's 1.35 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ACCO currently trades 94.2% from its 52-week high vs KELYA's 66.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.71x | 0.12x | 1.35x | 0.51x | 0.96x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $52.94 | $88.67 | $4.29 | $229.24 | $14.94 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $36.96 | $74.31 | $2.81 | $165.46 | $7.98 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +75.9% | +87.7% | +94.2% | +72.8% | +66.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 55.8 | 37.9 | 74.9 | 39.5 | 59.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 513K | 1.2M | 1.2M | 2.1M | 364K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — ABM and ACCO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ABM as "Hold", SCI as "Buy", ACCO as "Hold", CTAS as "Hold", KELYA as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 98.0% upside for ACCO (target: $8) vs 19.7% for SCI (target: $93). For income investors, ACCO offers the higher dividend yield at 7.11% vs CTAS's 0.89%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $50.00 | $93.00 | $8.00 | $223.40 | $15.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 11 | 10 | 7 | 30 | 5 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.6% | +1.7% | +7.1% | +0.9% | +3.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 36 | 12 | 0 | 3 | 5 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.05 | $1.29 | $0.29 | $1.49 | $0.31 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +5.2% | +4.3% | +4.1% | +1.4% | +3.5% |
CTAS leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). KELYA leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
ABM vs SCI vs ACCO vs CTAS vs KELYA: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ABM or SCI or ACCO or CTAS or KELYA a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Cintas Corporation (CTAS) is the stronger pick with 7.
7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -8. 5% for ACCO Brands Corporation (ACCO). ACCO Brands Corporation (ACCO) offers the better valuation at 9. 2x trailing P/E (4. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Service Corporation International (SCI) a "Buy" — based on 10 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which has the better valuation — ABM or SCI or ACCO or CTAS or KELYA?
On trailing P/E, ACCO Brands Corporation (ACCO) is the cheapest at 9.
2x versus Cintas Corporation at 37. 9x. On forward P/E, ACCO Brands Corporation is actually cheaper at 4. 6x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: ABM Industries Incorporated wins at 0. 04x versus Service Corporation International's 3. 30x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ABM or SCI or ACCO or CTAS or KELYA?
Over the past 5 years, Cintas Corporation (CTAS) delivered a total return of +92.
4%, compared to -57. 3% for Kelly Services, Inc. (KELYA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CTAS returned +671. 6% versus ACCO's -35. 3%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — ABM or SCI or ACCO or CTAS or KELYA?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Service Corporation International (SCI) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
12β versus ACCO Brands Corporation's 1. 35β — meaning ACCO is approximately 1037% more volatile than SCI relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Kelly Services, Inc. (KELYA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 16% versus 3% for Service Corporation International — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ABM or SCI or ACCO or CTAS or KELYA?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Cintas Corporation (CTAS) is pulling ahead at 7.
7% versus -8. 5% for ACCO Brands Corporation (ACCO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: ACCO Brands Corporation grew EPS 141. 5% year-over-year, compared to -427. 4% for Kelly Services, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CTAS leads at 9. 6% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.
06Which has better profit margins — ABM or SCI or ACCO or CTAS or KELYA?
Cintas Corporation (CTAS) is the more profitable company, earning 17.
5% net margin versus -6. 0% for Kelly Services, Inc. — meaning it keeps 17. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CTAS leads at 22. 8% versus -1. 6% for KELYA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CTAS leads at 50. 0%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
07Is ABM or SCI or ACCO or CTAS or KELYA more undervalued right now?
The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.
By this metric, ABM Industries Incorporated (ABM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 04x versus Service Corporation International's 3. 30x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, ACCO Brands Corporation (ACCO) trades at 4. 6x forward P/E versus 34. 1x for Cintas Corporation — 29. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ACCO: 98. 0% to $8. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — ABM or SCI or ACCO or CTAS or KELYA?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
ACCO Brands Corporation (ACCO) offers the highest yield at 7. 1%, versus 0. 9% for Cintas Corporation (CTAS).
09Is ABM or SCI or ACCO or CTAS or KELYA better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Service Corporation International (SCI) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
12), 1. 7% yield, +222. 7% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (SCI: +222. 7%, ACCO: -35. 3%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
10What are the main differences between ABM and SCI and ACCO and CTAS and KELYA?
These companies operate in different sectors (ABM (Industrials) and SCI (Consumer Cyclical) and ACCO (Industrials) and CTAS (Industrials) and KELYA (Industrials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: ABM is a small-cap deep-value stock; SCI is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; ACCO is a small-cap deep-value stock; CTAS is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; KELYA is a small-cap income-oriented stock. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.