Manufacturing - Tools & Accessories
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
HLMN vs FERG vs GWW vs SITE
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Industrial - Distribution
Industrial - Distribution
Industrial - Distribution
HLMN vs FERG vs GWW vs SITE — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Manufacturing - Tools & Accessories | Industrial - Distribution | Industrial - Distribution | Industrial - Distribution |
| Market Cap | $1.55B | $48.02B | $58.41B | $5.54B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.56B | $31.63B | $18.38B | $4.71B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $36M | $2.07B | $1.78B | $153M |
| Gross Margin | 46.1% | 30.7% | 39.2% | 34.9% |
| Operating Margin | 6.9% | 9.2% | 14.2% | 5.1% |
| Forward P/E | 13.5x | 22.1x | 28.3x | 28.7x |
| Total Debt | $828M | $5.97B | $3.16B | $980M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $27M | $674M | $585M | $191M |
HLMN vs FERG vs GWW vs SITE — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Dec 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hillman Solutions C… (HLMN) | 100 | 75.2 | -24.8% |
| Ferguson plc (FERG) | 100 | 208.0 | +108.0% |
| W.W. Grainger, Inc. (GWW) | 100 | 302.2 | +202.2% |
| SiteOne Landscape S… (SITE) | 100 | 78.8 | -21.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: HLMN vs FERG vs GWW vs SITE
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
HLMN is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 5.4%, EPS growth 122.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 1.5%
- 5.4% revenue growth vs SITE's 3.6%
- Lower P/E (13.5x vs 22.1x)
FERG is the clearest fit if your priority is dividends and momentum.
- 1.0% yield, vs GWW's 0.8%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
- +48.6% vs SITE's +5.6%
GWW carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 37 yrs, beta 0.89, yield 0.8%
- 463.0% 10Y total return vs FERG's 373.2%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.89, Low D/E 76.4%, current ratio 2.83x
- PEG 1.27 vs SITE's 6.91
SITE lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 5.4% revenue growth vs SITE's 3.6% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (13.5x vs 22.1x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 9.7% margin vs HLMN's 2.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.89 vs HLMN's 1.37 | |
| Dividends | 1.0% yield, vs GWW's 0.8%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +48.6% vs SITE's +5.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 19.7% ROA vs HLMN's 1.5%, ROIC 32.1% vs 4.5% |
HLMN vs FERG vs GWW vs SITE — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
HLMN vs FERG vs GWW vs SITE — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
GWW leads in 4 of 6 categories
HLMN leads 1 • FERG leads 0 • SITE leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
GWW 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 — 20.2x HLMN's $1.6B. GWW is the more profitable business, keeping 9.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to HLMN's 2.3%. On growth, GWW holds the edge at +10.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.6B | $31.6B | $18.4B | $4.7B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $251M | $3.3B | $2.8B | $382M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $36M | $2.1B | $1.8B | $153M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $91M | $1.0B | $1.4B | $246M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +46.1% | +30.7% | +39.2% | +34.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +6.9% | +9.2% | +14.2% | +5.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +2.3% | +6.6% | +9.7% | +3.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +5.9% | +3.2% | +7.5% | +5.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +3.0% | -2.0% | +10.1% | +0.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +2.9% | +18.2% | +1.6% |
Valuation Metrics
HLMN leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 26.5x trailing earnings, FERG trades at a 33% valuation discount to HLMN's 39.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), FERG offers better value at 1.55x vs SITE's 8.94x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.5B | $48.0B | $58.4B | $5.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.3B | $53.3B | $61.0B | $6.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 39.40x | 26.45x | 34.86x | 37.08x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 13.52x | 22.12x | 28.29x | 28.67x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.55x | 1.56x | 8.94x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 9.07x | 17.90x | 20.71x | 16.70x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.00x | 1.56x | 3.26x | 1.18x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.28x | 8.42x | 14.30x | 3.35x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 44.07x | 29.96x | 43.88x | 22.44x |
Profitability & Efficiency
GWW leads this category, winning 6 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 $3 for HLMN. SITE carries lower financial leverage with a 0.58x 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 FERG's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +2.9% | +35.1% | +43.1% | +9.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.5% | +11.8% | +19.7% | +4.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +4.5% | +18.0% | +32.1% | +7.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +5.6% | +22.6% | +39.7% | +9.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 6 | 8 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.67x | 1.02x | 0.76x | 0.58x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $801M | $5.3B | $2.6B | $789M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $27M | $674M | $585M | $191M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $828M | $6.0B | $3.2B | $980M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.96x | 15.59x | 22.63x | 6.79x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
GWW leads this category, winning 5 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 $6,157 for SITE. Over the past 12 months, FERG leads with a +48.6% total return vs SITE's +5.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors GWW at 22.8% vs SITE's -6.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -9.5% | +10.4% | +23.2% | -0.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +7.8% | +48.6% | +19.1% | +5.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -3.1% | +82.0% | +85.3% | -18.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -30.4% | +97.7% | +173.2% | -38.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -19.7% | +373.2% | +463.0% | +368.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -1.0% | +22.1% | +22.8% | -6.7% |
Risk & Volatility
GWW leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
GWW is the less volatile stock with a 0.89 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than HLMN's 1.37 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. GWW currently trades 95.9% from its 52-week high vs HLMN's 72.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.37x | 1.24x | 0.89x | 1.24x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $10.85 | $271.64 | $1286.56 | $168.56 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $6.55 | $166.04 | $906.52 | $112.23 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +72.6% | +90.8% | +95.9% | +74.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 41.8 | 48.1 | 58.3 | 36.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.5M | 1.3M | 239K | 689K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — FERG and GWW each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: HLMN as "Buy", FERG as "Buy", GWW as "Hold", SITE as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 77.7% upside for HLMN (target: $14) vs -6.2% for GWW (target: $1157). For income investors, FERG offers the higher dividend yield at 1.00% vs GWW's 0.79%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $14.00 | $271.00 | $1157.43 | $162.29 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 7 | 14 | 38 | 15 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.0% | +0.8% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 37 | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $2.45 | $9.73 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.8% | +2.0% | +1.8% | +1.8% |
GWW leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). HLMN leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
HLMN vs FERG vs GWW vs SITE: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is HLMN or FERG or GWW or SITE a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Hillman Solutions Corp.
(HLMN) is the stronger pick with 5. 4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 6% for SiteOne Landscape Supply, Inc. (SITE). Ferguson plc (FERG) offers the better valuation at 26. 5x trailing P/E (22. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Hillman Solutions Corp. (HLMN) 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 — HLMN or FERG or GWW or SITE?
On trailing P/E, Ferguson plc (FERG) is the cheapest at 26.
5x versus Hillman Solutions Corp. at 39. 4x. On forward P/E, Hillman Solutions Corp. is actually cheaper at 13. 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: W. W. Grainger, Inc. wins at 1. 27x versus SiteOne Landscape Supply, Inc. 's 6. 91x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — HLMN or FERG or GWW or SITE?
Over the past 5 years, W.
W. Grainger, Inc. (GWW) delivered a total return of +173. 2%, compared to -38. 4% for SiteOne Landscape Supply, Inc. (SITE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GWW returned +463. 0% versus HLMN's -19. 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 — HLMN or FERG or GWW or SITE?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), W.
W. Grainger, Inc. (GWW) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 89β versus Hillman Solutions Corp. 's 1. 37β — meaning HLMN is approximately 55% more volatile than GWW relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, SiteOne Landscape Supply, Inc. (SITE) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 58% versus 102% for Ferguson plc — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — HLMN or FERG or GWW or SITE?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Hillman Solutions Corp.
(HLMN) is pulling ahead at 5. 4% versus 3. 6% for SiteOne Landscape Supply, Inc. (SITE). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Hillman Solutions Corp. grew EPS 122. 2% year-over-year, compared to -8. 6% for W. W. Grainger, 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 — HLMN or FERG or GWW or SITE?
W.
W. Grainger, Inc. (GWW) is the more profitable company, earning 9. 5% net margin versus 2. 6% for Hillman Solutions Corp. — meaning it keeps 9. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: GWW leads at 15. 0% versus 5. 1% for SITE. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — HLMN leads at 39. 6%, 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 HLMN or FERG or GWW or SITE 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, W. W. Grainger, Inc. (GWW) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 27x versus SiteOne Landscape Supply, Inc. 's 6. 91x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Hillman Solutions Corp. (HLMN) trades at 13. 5x forward P/E versus 28. 7x for SiteOne Landscape Supply, Inc. — 15. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for HLMN: 77. 7% to $14. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — HLMN or FERG or GWW or SITE?
In this comparison, FERG (1.
0% yield), GWW (0. 8% yield) pay a dividend. HLMN, SITE do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is HLMN or FERG or GWW or SITE better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, W.
W. Grainger, Inc. (GWW) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 89), 0. 8% yield, +463. 0% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (GWW: +463. 0%, HLMN: -19. 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 HLMN and FERG and GWW and SITE?
Both stocks operate in the Industrials sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
FERG, GWW pay a dividend while HLMN, SITE do 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.