GFF vs MAS

For growth investors, Masco Corporation (MAS) is the stronger pick with -3.

4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 9% for Griffon Corporation (GFF). Masco Corporation (MAS) offers the better valuation at 18. 6x trailing P/E (16. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Griffon Corporation (GFF) 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.

On trailing P/E, Masco Corporation (MAS) is the cheapest at 18.

6x versus Griffon Corporation at 83. 2x. On forward P/E, Masco Corporation is actually cheaper at 16. 9x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Griffon Corporation wins at 0. 97x versus Masco Corporation's 3. 40x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Griffon Corporation (GFF) delivered a total return of +265.

3%, compared to +16. 1% for Masco Corporation (MAS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GFF returned +558. 1% versus MAS's +152. 1%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Masco Corporation (MAS) is the lower-risk stock at 1.

28β versus Griffon Corporation's 1. 36β — meaning GFF is approximately 6% more volatile than MAS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Griffon Corporation (GFF) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 22% versus 46% for Masco Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Masco Corporation (MAS) is pulling ahead at -3.

4% versus -3. 9% for Griffon Corporation (GFF). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Masco Corporation grew EPS 2. 7% year-over-year, compared to -74. 2% for Griffon Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, GFF leads at -4. 0% 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.

Masco Corporation (MAS) is the more profitable company, earning 10.

7% net margin versus 2. 0% for Griffon Corporation — meaning it keeps 10. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MAS leads at 16. 8% versus 8. 2% for GFF. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — GFF leads at 42. 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.

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, Griffon Corporation (GFF) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 97x versus Masco Corporation's 3. 40x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Masco Corporation (MAS) trades at 16. 9x forward P/E versus 17. 3x for Griffon Corporation — 0. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for GFF: 23. 0% to $111. 50.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Masco Corporation (MAS) offers the highest yield at 1. 7%, versus 0. 9% for Griffon Corporation (GFF).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Griffon Corporation (GFF) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (0.

9% yield, +558. 1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (GFF: +558. 1%, MAS: +152. 1%), 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.

Both stocks operate in the Industrials sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

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.