Personal Products & Services
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CSV vs SCI vs MATW vs HI vs ACCO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Personal Products & Services
Conglomerates
Industrial - Machinery
Business Equipment & Supplies
CSV vs SCI vs MATW vs HI vs ACCO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Personal Products & Services | Personal Products & Services | Conglomerates | Industrial - Machinery | Business Equipment & Supplies |
| Market Cap | $739M | $10.88B | $874M | $2.26B | $372M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $416M | $4.33B | $1.21B | $2.52B | $1.55B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $44M | $626M | $10M | $35M | $74M |
| Gross Margin | 35.3% | 26.2% | 35.7% | 33.7% | 30.7% |
| Operating Margin | 22.2% | 22.4% | -0.5% | 6.1% | 7.9% |
| Forward P/E | 13.6x | 18.8x | 35.1x | 12.4x | 4.8x |
| Total Debt | $563M | $5.14B | $764M | $1.60B | $921M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $2M | $244M | $32M | $165M | $64M |
CSV vs SCI vs MATW vs HI vs ACCO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Carriage Services, … (CSV) | 100 | 248.8 | +148.8% |
| Service Corporation… (SCI) | 100 | 198.9 | +98.9% |
| Matthews Internatio… (MATW) | 100 | 135.6 | +35.6% |
| Hillenbrand, Inc. (HI) | 100 | 124.0 | +24.0% |
| ACCO Brands Corpora… (ACCO) | 100 | 65.1 | -34.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CSV vs SCI vs MATW vs HI vs ACCO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CSV ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure and valuation efficiency.
- Rev growth 3.3%, EPS growth 54.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 4.1%
- PEG 0.46 vs SCI's 3.29
- 3.3% revenue growth vs MATW's -16.6%
SCI carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding.
- 226.8% 10Y total return vs CSV's 112.1%
- 14.5% margin vs MATW's 0.8%
- Beta 0.11 vs HI's 1.92
- 3.4% ROA vs MATW's 0.6%, ROIC 11.3% vs 1.2%
MATW is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 1.03, yield 3.8%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.03, current ratio 1.48x
HI is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +65.2% vs SCI's +3.8%
ACCO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if defensive is your priority.
- Beta 1.33, yield 7.1%, current ratio 1.61x
- Lower P/E (4.8x vs 12.4x)
- 7.1% yield, vs MATW's 3.8%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 3.3% revenue growth vs MATW's -16.6% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (4.8x vs 12.4x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 14.5% margin vs MATW's 0.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.11 vs HI's 1.92 | |
| Dividends | 7.1% yield, vs MATW's 3.8% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +65.2% vs SCI's +3.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 3.4% ROA vs MATW's 0.6%, ROIC 11.3% vs 1.2% |
CSV vs SCI vs MATW vs HI vs ACCO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CSV vs SCI vs MATW vs HI vs ACCO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
SCI leads in 2 of 6 categories
ACCO leads 1 • CSV leads 1 • MATW leads 0 • HI leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SCI leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SCI is the larger business by revenue, generating $4.3B annually — 10.4x CSV's $416M. SCI is the more profitable business, keeping 14.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to MATW's 0.8%. On growth, ACCO holds the edge at +8.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $416M | $4.3B | $1.2B | $2.5B | $1.6B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $111M | $1.2B | $38M | $286M | $177M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $44M | $626M | $10M | $35M | $74M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $40M | $629M | -$80M | $8M | $49M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +35.3% | +26.2% | +35.7% | +33.7% | +30.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +22.2% | +22.4% | -0.5% | +6.1% | +7.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +10.6% | +14.5% | +0.8% | +1.4% | +4.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +9.7% | +14.5% | -6.6% | +0.3% | +3.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -0.9% | +2.1% | -39.5% | -22.2% | +8.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -37.3% | +65.3% | -137.9% | -133.1% | +2.4% |
Valuation Metrics
ACCO leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 9.2x trailing earnings, ACCO trades at a 83% valuation discount to HI's 52.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), CSV offers better value at 0.48x vs SCI's 3.62x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $739M | $10.9B | $874M | $2.3B | $372M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.3B | $15.8B | $1.6B | $3.7B | $1.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 14.33x | 20.64x | -35.53x | 52.43x | 9.16x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 13.56x | 18.77x | 35.09x | 12.41x | 4.80x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.48x | 3.62x | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 10.43x | 12.01x | 17.44x | 12.54x | 6.79x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.77x | 2.53x | 0.58x | 0.85x | 0.24x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.86x | 6.83x | 1.81x | 1.59x | 0.57x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 18.44x | 19.63x | — | 126.31x | 7.32x |
Profitability & Efficiency
SCI leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
SCI delivers a 39.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $39 in annual profit, vs $2 for MATW. HI carries lower financial leverage with a 1.12x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to SCI's 3.14x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), SCI scores 7/9 vs MATW's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +17.6% | +39.4% | +1.9% | +2.4% | +11.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +3.3% | +3.4% | +0.6% | +0.8% | +3.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +9.4% | +11.3% | +1.2% | +3.8% | +5.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +7.9% | +5.6% | +1.5% | +4.2% | +6.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 2.21x | 3.14x | 1.59x | 1.12x | 1.39x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $561M | $4.9B | $732M | $1.4B | $856M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $2M | $244M | $32M | $165M | $64M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $563M | $5.1B | $764M | $1.6B | $921M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 2.33x | 3.78x | 4.89x | 0.67x | 2.50x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CSV leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in SCI five years ago would be worth $15,128 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,156 for ACCO. Over the past 12 months, HI leads with a +65.2% total return vs SCI's +3.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CSV at 21.0% vs HI's -9.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +12.8% | +2.0% | +9.2% | +0.8% | +11.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +16.3% | +3.8% | +54.7% | +65.2% | +21.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +77.2% | +25.3% | -17.8% | -26.5% | -5.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +26.9% | +51.3% | -22.4% | -22.6% | -38.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +112.1% | +226.8% | -30.4% | +33.0% | -35.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +21.0% | +7.8% | -6.3% | -9.8% | -1.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — SCI and HI each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
SCI is the less volatile stock with a 0.11 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than HI's 1.92 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. HI currently trades 99.7% from its 52-week high vs SCI's 88.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.66x | 0.11x | 1.03x | 1.92x | 1.33x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $52.14 | $88.67 | $30.93 | $32.07 | $4.29 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $39.38 | $74.14 | $18.61 | $18.46 | $2.81 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +89.3% | +88.5% | +90.8% | +99.7% | +93.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 48.3 | 40.2 | 61.6 | 68.2 | 74.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 94K | 1.2M | 182K | 0 | 1.2M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — MATW and ACCO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CSV as "Buy", SCI as "Buy", MATW as "Buy", HI as "Buy", ACCO as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 98.5% upside for ACCO (target: $8) vs 0.1% for HI (target: $32). For income investors, ACCO offers the higher dividend yield at 7.13% vs CSV's 0.96%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $50.00 | $93.00 | — | $32.00 | $8.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 7 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 7 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.0% | +1.6% | +3.8% | +2.8% | +7.1% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 6 | 12 | 15 | 4 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.45 | $1.29 | $1.05 | $0.90 | $0.29 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +4.2% | +1.4% | 0.0% | +4.1% |
SCI leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). ACCO leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
CSV vs SCI vs MATW vs HI vs ACCO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CSV or SCI or MATW or HI or ACCO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Carriage Services, Inc.
(CSV) is the stronger pick with 3. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -16. 6% for Matthews International Corporation (MATW). ACCO Brands Corporation (ACCO) offers the better valuation at 9. 2x trailing P/E (4. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Carriage Services, Inc. (CSV) a "Buy" — based on 7 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 — CSV or SCI or MATW or HI or ACCO?
On trailing P/E, ACCO Brands Corporation (ACCO) is the cheapest at 9.
2x versus Hillenbrand, Inc. at 52. 4x. On forward P/E, ACCO Brands Corporation is actually cheaper at 4. 8x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Carriage Services, Inc. wins at 0. 46x versus Service Corporation International's 3. 29x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CSV or SCI or MATW or HI or ACCO?
Over the past 5 years, Service Corporation International (SCI) delivered a total return of +51.
3%, compared to -38. 4% for ACCO Brands Corporation (ACCO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: SCI returned +226. 8% 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 — CSV or SCI or MATW or HI or ACCO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Service Corporation International (SCI) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
11β versus Hillenbrand, Inc. 's 1. 92β — meaning HI is approximately 1583% more volatile than SCI relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Hillenbrand, Inc. (HI) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 112% versus 3% for Service Corporation International — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CSV or SCI or MATW or HI or ACCO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Carriage Services, Inc.
(CSV) is pulling ahead at 3. 3% versus -16. 6% for Matthews International Corporation (MATW). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: ACCO Brands Corporation grew EPS 141. 5% year-over-year, compared to 7. 6% for Service Corporation International. Over a 3-year CAGR, HI leads at 4. 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 — CSV or SCI or MATW or HI or ACCO?
Service Corporation International (SCI) is the more profitable company, earning 12.
6% net margin versus -1. 6% for Matthews International Corporation — meaning it keeps 12. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CSV leads at 23. 7% versus 1. 4% for MATW. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CSV leads at 35. 3%, 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 CSV or SCI or MATW or HI or ACCO 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, Carriage Services, Inc. (CSV) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 46x versus Service Corporation International's 3. 29x. 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. 8x forward P/E versus 35. 1x for Matthews International Corporation — 30. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ACCO: 98. 5% to $8. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — CSV or SCI or MATW or HI or ACCO?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
ACCO Brands Corporation (ACCO) offers the highest yield at 7. 1%, versus 1. 0% for Carriage Services, Inc. (CSV).
09Is CSV or SCI or MATW or HI or ACCO 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.
11), 1. 6% yield, +226. 8% 10Y return). Hillenbrand, Inc. (HI) carries a higher beta of 1. 92 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (SCI: +226. 8%, HI: +33. 0%), 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 CSV and SCI and MATW and HI and ACCO?
These companies operate in different sectors (CSV (Consumer Cyclical) and SCI (Consumer Cyclical) and MATW (Industrials) and HI (Industrials) and ACCO (Industrials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: CSV is a small-cap deep-value stock; SCI is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; MATW is a small-cap income-oriented stock; HI is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ACCO is a small-cap deep-value 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.