Security & Protection Services
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CIX vs ALLE vs FBIN vs NNBR vs TWIN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Security & Protection Services
Construction
Conglomerates
Industrial - Machinery
CIX vs ALLE vs FBIN vs NNBR vs TWIN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Security & Protection Services | Security & Protection Services | Construction | Conglomerates | Industrial - Machinery |
| Market Cap | $293M | $11.76B | $4.68B | $139M | $266M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $159M | $4.16B | $3.36B | $435M | $348M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $20M | $634M | $195M | $-35M | $22M |
| Gross Margin | 31.1% | 45.0% | 45.6% | 2.3% | 27.9% |
| Operating Margin | 15.0% | 20.6% | 10.6% | -3.3% | 3.3% |
| Forward P/E | 88.0x | 15.6x | 11.5x | 43.6x | 25.2x |
| Total Debt | $0.00 | $2.28B | $2.54B | $211M | $49M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $54M | $356M | $264M | $11M | $16M |
CIX vs ALLE vs FBIN vs NNBR vs TWIN — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| CompX International… (CIX) | 100 | 168.8 | +68.8% |
| Allegion plc (ALLE) | 100 | 137.2 | +37.2% |
| Fortune Brands Inno… (FBIN) | 100 | 75.0 | -25.0% |
| NN, Inc. (NNBR) | 100 | 61.7 | -38.3% |
| Twin Disc, Incorpor… (TWIN) | 100 | 335.3 | +235.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CIX vs ALLE vs FBIN vs NNBR vs TWIN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CIX carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.50, yield 9.3%
- Rev growth 8.5%, EPS growth 17.0%, 3Y rev CAGR -1.7%
- 223.2% 10Y total return vs TWIN's 87.2%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.50, current ratio 5.87x
ALLE ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.92 vs CIX's 6.40
- 15.2% margin vs NNBR's -8.0%
FBIN is the clearest fit if your priority is value.
- Lower P/E (11.5x vs 25.2x)
Among these 5 stocks, NNBR doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
TWIN is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth and momentum is your priority.
- 15.5% revenue growth vs NNBR's -9.1%
- +156.5% vs FBIN's -16.8%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 15.5% revenue growth vs NNBR's -9.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (11.5x vs 25.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 15.2% margin vs NNBR's -8.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.50 vs NNBR's 2.04 | |
| Dividends | 9.3% yield, vs ALLE's 1.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +156.5% vs FBIN's -16.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 12.8% ROA vs NNBR's -7.7%, ROIC 20.0% vs -4.5% |
CIX vs ALLE vs FBIN vs NNBR vs TWIN — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CIX vs ALLE vs FBIN vs NNBR vs TWIN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ALLE leads in 1 of 6 categories
CIX leads 1 • NNBR leads 1 • FBIN leads 0 • TWIN leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ALLE leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ALLE is the larger business by revenue, generating $4.2B annually — 26.2x CIX's $159M. ALLE is the more profitable business, keeping 15.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NNBR's -8.0%. On growth, NNBR holds the edge at +12.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $159M | $4.2B | $3.4B | $435M | $348M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $26M | $959M | $482M | $22M | $27M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $20M | $634M | $195M | -$35M | $22M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $22M | $704M | $420M | -$1M | -$70,000 |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +31.1% | +45.0% | +45.6% | +2.3% | +27.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +15.0% | +20.6% | +10.6% | -3.3% | +3.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +12.7% | +15.2% | +5.8% | -8.0% | +6.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +13.9% | +16.9% | +12.5% | -0.3% | -0.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +0.7% | +9.7% | -106.4% | +12.1% | +0.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +14.3% | -7.0% | -2.0% | -8.7% | +22.7% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — FBIN and NNBR each lead in 2 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 15.0x trailing earnings, CIX trades at a 18% valuation discount to ALLE's 18.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), ALLE offers better value at 1.08x vs FBIN's 2.77x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $293M | $11.8B | $4.7B | $139M | $266M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $239M | $13.7B | $7.0B | $338M | $299M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 15.03x | 18.39x | 15.82x | -2.58x | -131.50x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 87.96x | 15.60x | 11.50x | 43.60x | 25.22x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 1.09x | 1.08x | 2.77x | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 9.09x | 13.83x | 10.08x | 19.03x | 12.05x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.85x | 2.89x | 1.05x | 0.33x | 0.78x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.11x | 5.72x | 1.98x | 0.93x | 1.55x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 15.30x | 17.14x | 12.77x | 19.16x | 30.10x |
Profitability & Efficiency
CIX leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ALLE delivers a 32.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $32 in annual profit, vs $-28 for NNBR. TWIN carries lower financial leverage with a 0.30x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NNBR's 1.44x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), FBIN scores 7/9 vs NNBR's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +14.3% | +32.1% | +8.3% | -28.4% | +13.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +12.8% | +12.3% | +3.0% | -7.7% | +6.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +20.0% | +18.1% | +8.1% | -4.5% | +3.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +15.8% | +20.8% | +9.9% | -5.0% | +4.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 3 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 1.10x | 1.07x | 1.44x | 0.30x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$54M | $1.9B | $2.3B | $200M | $33M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $54M | $356M | $264M | $11M | $16M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $0 | $2.3B | $2.5B | $211M | $49M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 8.61x | 4.72x | -0.74x | 1.82x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
NNBR leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in TWIN five years ago would be worth $14,753 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,660 for NNBR. Over the past 12 months, TWIN leads with a +156.5% total return vs FBIN's -16.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NNBR at 40.7% vs FBIN's -13.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +4.6% | -14.6% | -22.8% | +106.0% | +13.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +0.2% | -1.0% | -16.8% | +50.8% | +156.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +56.6% | +32.6% | -36.3% | +178.4% | +55.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +46.0% | +3.2% | -54.0% | -63.4% | +47.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +223.2% | +127.3% | -2.4% | -75.7% | +87.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +16.1% | +9.9% | -13.9% | +40.7% | +15.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CIX and TWIN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CIX is the less volatile stock with a 0.50 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NNBR's 2.04 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. TWIN currently trades 93.8% from its 52-week high vs FBIN's 60.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.50x | 0.67x | 1.61x | 2.04x | 1.04x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $32.30 | $183.11 | $64.84 | $2.99 | $19.63 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $20.29 | $131.25 | $36.07 | $1.10 | $6.80 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +73.5% | +74.7% | +60.3% | +92.3% | +93.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 64.7 | 38.5 | 46.8 | 65.6 | 58.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 3K | 887K | 2.6M | 936K | 49K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — CIX and ALLE each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ALLE as "Hold", FBIN as "Hold", NNBR as "Buy", TWIN as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 53.1% upside for FBIN (target: $60) vs 26.1% for ALLE (target: $173). For income investors, CIX offers the higher dividend yield at 9.26% vs TWIN's 0.90%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Hold | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $172.50 | $59.83 | — | — |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 23 | 27 | 9 | 4 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +9.3% | +1.5% | +2.5% | — | +0.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 12 | 2 | 0 | 3 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $2.20 | $2.03 | $1.00 | — | $0.16 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.7% | +5.3% | 0.0% | +0.5% |
ALLE leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). CIX leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
CIX vs ALLE vs FBIN vs NNBR vs TWIN: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CIX or ALLE or FBIN or NNBR or TWIN a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Twin Disc, Incorporated (TWIN) is the stronger pick with 15.
5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -9. 1% for NN, Inc. (NNBR). CompX International Inc. (CIX) offers the better valuation at 15. 0x trailing P/E (88. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate NN, Inc. (NNBR) a "Buy" — based on 9 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 — CIX or ALLE or FBIN or NNBR or TWIN?
On trailing P/E, CompX International Inc.
(CIX) is the cheapest at 15. 0x versus Allegion plc at 18. 4x. On forward P/E, Fortune Brands Innovations, Inc. is actually cheaper at 11. 5x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Allegion plc wins at 0. 92x versus CompX International Inc. 's 6. 40x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CIX or ALLE or FBIN or NNBR or TWIN?
Over the past 5 years, Twin Disc, Incorporated (TWIN) delivered a total return of +47.
5%, compared to -63. 4% for NN, Inc. (NNBR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CIX returned +223. 2% versus NNBR's -75. 7%. 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 — CIX or ALLE or FBIN or NNBR or TWIN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), CompX International Inc.
(CIX) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 50β versus NN, Inc. 's 2. 04β — meaning NNBR is approximately 309% more volatile than CIX relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Twin Disc, Incorporated (TWIN) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 30% versus 144% for NN, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CIX or ALLE or FBIN or NNBR or TWIN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Twin Disc, Incorporated (TWIN) is pulling ahead at 15.
5% versus -9. 1% for NN, Inc. (NNBR). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: CompX International Inc. grew EPS 17. 0% year-over-year, compared to -117. 7% for Twin Disc, Incorporated. Over a 3-year CAGR, TWIN leads at 11. 9% 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 — CIX or ALLE or FBIN or NNBR or TWIN?
Allegion plc (ALLE) is the more profitable company, earning 15.
8% net margin versus -8. 1% for NN, Inc. — meaning it keeps 15. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ALLE leads at 21. 1% versus -4. 3% for NNBR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ALLE leads at 45. 2%, 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 CIX or ALLE or FBIN or NNBR or TWIN 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, Allegion plc (ALLE) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 92x versus CompX International Inc. 's 6. 40x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Fortune Brands Innovations, Inc. (FBIN) trades at 11. 5x forward P/E versus 88. 0x for CompX International Inc. — 76. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FBIN: 53. 1% to $59. 83.
08Which pays a better dividend — CIX or ALLE or FBIN or NNBR or TWIN?
In this comparison, CIX (9.
3% yield), FBIN (2. 5% yield), ALLE (1. 5% yield), TWIN (0. 9% yield) pay a dividend. NNBR does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CIX or ALLE or FBIN or NNBR or TWIN better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, CompX International Inc.
(CIX) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 50), 9. 3% yield, +223. 2% 10Y return). NN, Inc. (NNBR) carries a higher beta of 2. 04 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (CIX: +223. 2%, NNBR: -75. 7%), 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 CIX and ALLE and FBIN and NNBR and TWIN?
Both stocks operate in the Industrials sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: CIX is a small-cap deep-value stock; ALLE is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; FBIN is a small-cap deep-value stock; NNBR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; TWIN is a small-cap high-growth stock. CIX, ALLE, FBIN, TWIN pay a dividend while NNBR does not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. 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.