Industrial - Distribution
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
FERG vs WSO vs GWW vs MSM vs FAST
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Industrial - Distribution
Industrial - Distribution
Industrial - Distribution
Industrial - Distribution
FERG vs WSO vs GWW vs MSM vs FAST — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Industrial - Distribution | Industrial - Distribution | Industrial - Distribution | Industrial - Distribution | Industrial - Distribution |
| Market Cap | $48.02B | $17.45B | $58.41B | $5.82B | $50.93B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $31.63B | $7.24B | $18.38B | $3.81B | $8.20B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $2.07B | $496M | $1.78B | $205M | $1.26B |
| Gross Margin | 30.7% | 28.4% | 39.2% | 40.7% | 45.0% |
| Operating Margin | 9.2% | 9.8% | 14.2% | 8.4% | 20.2% |
| Forward P/E | 21.5x | 33.3x | 28.3x | 24.0x | 35.7x |
| Total Debt | $5.97B | $479M | $3.16B | $539M | $442M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $674M | $433M | $585M | $56M | $277M |
FERG vs WSO vs GWW vs MSM vs FAST — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ferguson plc (FERG) | 100 | 304.7 | +204.7% |
| Watsco, Inc. (WSO) | 100 | 236.4 | +136.4% |
| W.W. Grainger, Inc. (GWW) | 100 | 398.5 | +298.5% |
| MSC Industrial Dire… (MSM) | 100 | 150.4 | +50.4% |
| Fastenal Company (FAST) | 100 | 214.1 | +114.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: FERG vs WSO vs GWW vs MSM vs FAST
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
FERG is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if valuation efficiency is your priority.
- PEG 1.26 vs FAST's 4.59
- Lower P/E (21.5x vs 35.7x), PEG 1.26 vs 4.59
- +48.6% vs WSO's -6.0%
WSO lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
GWW is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 463.0% 10Y total return vs FERG's 373.2%
MSM ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability.
- Dividend streak 4 yrs, beta 0.86, yield 3.3%
- 3.3% yield, 4-year raise streak, vs GWW's 0.8%
FAST carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 8.7%, EPS growth 9.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 5.5%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.69, Low D/E 11.2%, current ratio 4.85x
- Beta 0.69, yield 2.0%, current ratio 4.85x
- 8.7% revenue growth vs WSO's -5.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 8.7% revenue growth vs WSO's -5.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (21.5x vs 35.7x), PEG 1.26 vs 4.59 | |
| Quality / Margins | 15.3% margin vs MSM's 5.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.69 vs FERG's 1.24, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.3% yield, 4-year raise streak, vs GWW's 0.8% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +48.6% vs WSO's -6.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 24.9% ROA vs MSM's 8.2%, ROIC 31.2% vs 12.3% |
FERG vs WSO vs GWW vs MSM vs FAST — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
FERG vs WSO vs GWW vs MSM vs FAST — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
FAST leads in 1 of 6 categories
MSM leads 1 • GWW leads 1 • FERG leads 0 • WSO leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FAST leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FERG is the larger business by revenue, generating $31.6B annually — 8.3x MSM's $3.8B. FAST is the more profitable business, keeping 15.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to MSM's 5.4%. On growth, FAST holds the edge at +11.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $31.6B | $7.2B | $18.4B | $3.8B | $8.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $3.3B | $757M | $2.8B | $414M | $1.8B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $2.1B | $496M | $1.8B | $205M | $1.3B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $1.0B | $702M | $1.4B | $167M | $1.1B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +30.7% | +28.4% | +39.2% | +40.7% | +45.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +9.2% | +9.8% | +14.2% | +8.4% | +20.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +6.6% | +6.8% | +9.7% | +5.4% | +15.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +3.2% | +9.7% | +7.5% | +4.4% | +12.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -2.0% | +0.1% | +10.1% | +4.0% | +11.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +2.9% | -3.1% | +18.2% | +12.0% | +13.0% |
Valuation Metrics
MSM leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 26.5x trailing earnings, FERG trades at a 35% valuation discount to FAST's 40.7x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), FERG offers better value at 1.55x vs FAST's 5.24x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $48.0B | $17.5B | $58.4B | $5.8B | $50.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $53.3B | $17.5B | $61.0B | $6.3B | $51.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 26.45x | 35.04x | 34.86x | 29.22x | 40.70x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 21.49x | 33.27x | 28.29x | 23.99x | 35.66x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 1.55x | 2.97x | 1.56x | — | 5.24x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 17.90x | 23.76x | 20.71x | 15.61x | 30.86x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.56x | 2.41x | 3.26x | 1.54x | 6.21x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 8.42x | 5.05x | 14.30x | 4.17x | 12.94x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 29.96x | 32.59x | 43.88x | 24.17x | 48.48x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — GWW and FAST each lead in 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
GWW delivers a 43.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $43 in annual profit, vs $15 for MSM. FAST carries lower financial leverage with a 0.11x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to FERG's 1.02x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), GWW scores 8/9 vs MSM's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +35.1% | +15.3% | +43.1% | +14.8% | +31.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +11.8% | +10.8% | +19.7% | +8.2% | +24.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +18.0% | +16.6% | +32.1% | +12.3% | +31.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +22.6% | +19.0% | +39.7% | +17.5% | +39.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 5 | 8 | 5 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.02x | 0.15x | 0.76x | 0.39x | 0.11x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $5.3B | $46M | $2.6B | $483M | $165M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $674M | $433M | $585M | $56M | $277M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $6.0B | $479M | $3.2B | $539M | $442M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 15.59x | — | 22.63x | 12.56x | 259.39x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
GWW leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in GWW five years ago would be worth $27,320 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $12,874 for MSM. Over the past 12 months, FERG leads with a +48.6% total return vs WSO's -6.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors GWW at 22.8% vs MSM's 8.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +10.4% | +25.4% | +23.2% | +23.5% | +10.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +48.6% | -6.0% | +19.1% | +43.8% | +15.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +82.0% | +37.6% | +85.3% | +26.0% | +73.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +97.7% | +59.8% | +173.2% | +28.7% | +81.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +373.2% | +281.5% | +463.0% | +87.3% | +338.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +22.1% | +11.2% | +22.8% | +8.0% | +20.1% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MSM and FAST each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
FAST is the less volatile stock with a 0.69 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than FERG's 1.24 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MSM currently trades 97.4% from its 52-week high vs WSO's 86.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.19x | 1.12x | 0.87x | 0.85x | 0.65x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $271.64 | $496.25 | $1286.56 | $107.09 | $50.63 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $166.04 | $323.05 | $906.52 | $74.30 | $38.97 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +90.8% | +86.5% | +95.9% | +97.4% | +87.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 48.1 | 56.2 | 58.3 | 68.3 | 46.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.3M | 452K | 239K | 604K | 7.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — GWW and MSM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: FERG as "Buy", WSO as "Hold", GWW as "Hold", MSM as "Hold", FAST as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 11.4% upside for FERG (target: $275) vs -6.9% for WSO (target: $400). For income investors, MSM offers the higher dividend yield at 3.25% vs GWW's 0.79%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Hold | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $274.63 | $399.80 | $1157.43 | $97.75 | $46.57 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 14 | 26 | 38 | 28 | 31 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.0% | +2.9% | +0.8% | +3.3% | +2.0% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 12 | 37 | 4 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $2.45 | $12.50 | $9.73 | $3.39 | $0.87 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +2.0% | +0.0% | +1.8% | +0.7% | 0.0% |
FAST leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). MSM leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 3 tied.
FERG vs WSO vs GWW vs MSM vs FAST: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is FERG or WSO or GWW or MSM or FAST a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Fastenal Company (FAST) is the stronger pick with 8.
7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -5. 0% for Watsco, Inc. (WSO). Ferguson plc (FERG) offers the better valuation at 26. 5x trailing P/E (21. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Ferguson plc (FERG) a "Buy" — based on 14 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 — FERG or WSO or GWW or MSM or FAST?
On trailing P/E, Ferguson plc (FERG) is the cheapest at 26.
5x versus Fastenal Company at 40. 7x. On forward P/E, Ferguson plc is actually cheaper at 21. 5x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Ferguson plc wins at 1. 26x versus Fastenal Company's 4. 59x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — FERG or WSO or GWW or MSM or FAST?
Over the past 5 years, W.
W. Grainger, Inc. (GWW) delivered a total return of +173. 2%, compared to +28. 7% for MSC Industrial Direct Co. , Inc. (MSM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GWW returned +462. 8% versus MSM's +87. 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 — FERG or WSO or GWW or MSM or FAST?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Fastenal Company (FAST) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
65β versus Ferguson plc's 1. 19β — meaning FERG is approximately 83% more volatile than FAST relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Fastenal Company (FAST) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 11% versus 102% for Ferguson plc — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — FERG or WSO or GWW or MSM or FAST?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Fastenal Company (FAST) is pulling ahead at 8.
7% versus -5. 0% for Watsco, Inc. (WSO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Ferguson plc grew EPS 9. 3% year-over-year, compared to -22. 1% for MSC Industrial Direct Co. , Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, GWW leads at 5. 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 — FERG or WSO or GWW or MSM or FAST?
Fastenal Company (FAST) is the more profitable company, earning 15.
3% net margin versus 5. 3% for MSC Industrial Direct Co. , Inc. — meaning it keeps 15. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: FAST leads at 20. 2% versus 8. 3% for MSM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FAST leads at 45. 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 FERG or WSO or GWW or MSM or FAST 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, Ferguson plc (FERG) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 26x versus Fastenal Company's 4. 59x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Ferguson plc (FERG) trades at 21. 5x forward P/E versus 35. 7x for Fastenal Company — 14. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FERG: 11. 4% to $274. 63.
08Which pays a better dividend — FERG or WSO or GWW or MSM or FAST?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
MSC Industrial Direct Co. , Inc. (MSM) offers the highest yield at 3. 3%, versus 0. 8% for W. W. Grainger, Inc. (GWW).
09Is FERG or WSO or GWW or MSM or FAST better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Fastenal Company (FAST) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
65), 2. 0% yield, +336. 4% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (FAST: +336. 4%, FERG: +364. 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 FERG and WSO and GWW and MSM and FAST?
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: FERG is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; WSO is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; GWW is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; MSM is a small-cap income-oriented stock; FAST is a mid-cap quality compounder 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.