Manufacturing - Tools & Accessories
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
HLMN vs POOL vs SITE vs FERG vs MSM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Industrial - Distribution
Industrial - Distribution
Industrial - Distribution
Industrial - Distribution
HLMN vs POOL vs SITE vs FERG vs MSM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Manufacturing - Tools & Accessories | Industrial - Distribution | Industrial - Distribution | Industrial - Distribution | Industrial - Distribution |
| Market Cap | $1.54B | $6.90B | $5.36B | $47.01B | $5.82B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.56B | $5.36B | $4.71B | $31.63B | $3.81B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $36M | $406M | $153M | $2.07B | $205M |
| Gross Margin | 46.1% | 29.7% | 34.9% | 30.7% | 40.7% |
| Operating Margin | 6.9% | 10.9% | 5.1% | 9.2% | 8.4% |
| Forward P/E | 13.5x | 17.0x | 27.9x | 21.5x | 24.0x |
| Total Debt | $828M | $349M | $980M | $5.97B | $539M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $27M | $105M | $191M | $674M | $56M |
HLMN vs POOL vs SITE vs FERG vs MSM — 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 | 75.0 | -25.0% |
| Pool Corporation (POOL) | 100 | 50.4 | -49.6% |
| SiteOne Landscape S… (SITE) | 100 | 76.3 | -23.7% |
| Ferguson plc (FERG) | 100 | 203.7 | +103.7% |
| MSC Industrial Dire… (MSM) | 100 | 123.6 | +23.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: HLMN vs POOL vs SITE vs FERG vs MSM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
HLMN has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure.
- Rev growth 5.4%, EPS growth 122.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 1.5%
- 5.4% revenue growth vs MSM's -1.3%
- Lower P/E (13.5x vs 24.0x)
POOL is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.91, Low D/E 29.4%, current ratio 2.24x
- 7.6% margin vs HLMN's 2.3%
- 2.6% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs MSM's 3.3%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
Among these 5 stocks, SITE doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
FERG ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 364.3% 10Y total return vs SITE's 353.7%
- PEG 1.26 vs SITE's 6.72
- +43.1% vs POOL's -36.1%
- 11.8% ROA vs HLMN's 1.5%, ROIC 18.0% vs 4.5%
MSM is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 4 yrs, beta 0.85, yield 3.3%
- Beta 0.85, yield 3.3%, current ratio 1.68x
- Beta 0.85 vs HLMN's 1.39, lower leverage
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 5.4% revenue growth vs MSM's -1.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (13.5x vs 24.0x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 7.6% margin vs HLMN's 2.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.85 vs HLMN's 1.39, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.6% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs MSM's 3.3%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +43.1% vs POOL's -36.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 11.8% ROA vs HLMN's 1.5%, ROIC 18.0% vs 4.5% |
HLMN vs POOL vs SITE vs FERG vs MSM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
HLMN vs POOL vs SITE vs FERG vs MSM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
POOL leads in 1 of 6 categories
HLMN leads 1 • FERG leads 1 • MSM leads 1 • SITE leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
POOL leads this category, winning 4 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. POOL is the more profitable business, keeping 7.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to HLMN's 2.3%. On growth, POOL holds the edge at +6.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.6B | $5.4B | $4.7B | $31.6B | $3.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $251M | $636M | $382M | $3.3B | $414M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $36M | $406M | $153M | $2.1B | $205M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $91M | $605M | $246M | $1.0B | $167M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +46.1% | +29.7% | +34.9% | +30.7% | +40.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +6.9% | +10.9% | +5.1% | +9.2% | +8.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +2.3% | +7.6% | +3.2% | +6.6% | +5.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +5.9% | +11.3% | +5.2% | +3.2% | +4.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +3.0% | +6.2% | +0.1% | -2.0% | +4.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +2.1% | +1.6% | +2.9% | +12.0% |
Valuation Metrics
HLMN leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 17.3x trailing earnings, POOL trades at a 56% valuation discount to HLMN's 39.3x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), FERG offers better value at 1.52x vs SITE's 8.65x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.5B | $6.9B | $5.4B | $47.0B | $5.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.3B | $7.1B | $6.2B | $52.3B | $6.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 39.30x | 17.32x | 35.91x | 25.89x | 29.21x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 13.49x | 16.97x | 27.89x | 21.49x | 23.98x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 4.46x | 8.65x | 1.52x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 9.06x | 11.30x | 16.23x | 17.56x | 15.60x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.99x | 1.30x | 1.14x | 1.53x | 1.54x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.28x | 5.91x | 3.24x | 8.24x | 4.17x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 43.96x | 22.28x | 21.72x | 29.33x | 24.16x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — POOL and FERG each lead in 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
FERG delivers a 35.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $35 in annual profit, vs $3 for HLMN. POOL carries lower financial leverage with a 0.29x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to FERG's 1.02x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), SITE scores 8/9 vs MSM's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +2.9% | +32.2% | +9.1% | +35.1% | +14.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.5% | +11.3% | +4.6% | +11.8% | +8.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +4.5% | +22.3% | +7.3% | +18.0% | +12.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +5.6% | +22.0% | +9.6% | +22.6% | +17.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 6 | 8 | 6 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.67x | 0.29x | 0.58x | 1.02x | 0.39x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $801M | $244M | $789M | $5.3B | $483M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $27M | $105M | $191M | $674M | $56M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $828M | $349M | $980M | $6.0B | $539M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.96x | 12.20x | 6.79x | 15.59x | 12.56x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
FERG leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in FERG five years ago would be worth $19,339 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $4,704 for POOL. Over the past 12 months, FERG leads with a +43.1% total return vs POOL's -36.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors FERG at 21.3% vs POOL's -17.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -9.8% | -17.7% | -3.2% | +8.0% | +23.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +2.3% | -36.1% | -0.3% | +43.1% | +41.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -3.3% | -42.8% | -21.3% | +78.3% | +25.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -31.5% | -53.0% | -39.9% | +93.4% | +28.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -19.9% | +142.2% | +353.7% | +364.3% | +87.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -1.1% | -17.0% | -7.7% | +21.3% | +8.0% |
Risk & Volatility
MSM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MSM is the less volatile stock with a 0.85 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than HLMN's 1.39 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 POOL's 54.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.39x | 0.91x | 1.15x | 1.19x | 0.85x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $10.85 | $345.00 | $168.56 | $271.64 | $107.09 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $6.55 | $184.84 | $112.23 | $169.11 | $75.37 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +72.4% | +54.5% | +71.8% | +88.8% | +97.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 40.8 | 32.4 | 40.7 | 42.9 | 65.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.5M | 763K | 690K | 1.3M | 606K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — POOL and MSM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: HLMN as "Buy", POOL as "Buy", SITE as "Buy", FERG as "Buy", MSM as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 78.1% upside for HLMN (target: $14) vs -6.3% for MSM (target: $98). For income investors, MSM offers the higher dividend yield at 3.25% vs FERG's 1.02%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $14.00 | $279.29 | $162.29 | $274.63 | $97.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 7 | 21 | 15 | 14 | 28 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +2.6% | — | +1.0% | +3.3% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 15 | 2 | 0 | 4 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $4.96 | — | $2.45 | $3.39 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.8% | +5.0% | +1.8% | +2.0% | +0.7% |
POOL leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). HLMN leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
HLMN vs POOL vs SITE vs FERG vs MSM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is HLMN or POOL or SITE or FERG or MSM 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 -1. 3% for MSC Industrial Direct Co. , Inc. (MSM). Pool Corporation (POOL) offers the better valuation at 17. 3x trailing P/E (17. 0x 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 POOL or SITE or FERG or MSM?
On trailing P/E, Pool Corporation (POOL) is the cheapest at 17.
3x versus Hillman Solutions Corp. at 39. 3x. 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: Ferguson plc wins at 1. 26x versus SiteOne Landscape Supply, Inc. 's 6. 72x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — HLMN or POOL or SITE or FERG or MSM?
Over the past 5 years, Ferguson plc (FERG) delivered a total return of +93.
4%, compared to -53. 0% for Pool Corporation (POOL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: FERG returned +364. 3% versus HLMN's -19. 9%. 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 POOL or SITE or FERG or MSM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), MSC Industrial Direct Co.
, Inc. (MSM) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 85β versus Hillman Solutions Corp. 's 1. 39β — meaning HLMN is approximately 64% more volatile than MSM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Pool Corporation (POOL) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 29% versus 102% for Ferguson plc — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — HLMN or POOL or SITE or FERG or MSM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Hillman Solutions Corp.
(HLMN) is pulling ahead at 5. 4% versus -1. 3% for MSC Industrial Direct Co. , Inc. (MSM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Hillman Solutions Corp. grew EPS 122. 2% year-over-year, compared to -22. 1% for MSC Industrial Direct Co. , Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, SITE leads at 5. 4% 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 POOL or SITE or FERG or MSM?
Pool Corporation (POOL) is the more profitable company, earning 7.
7% net margin versus 2. 6% for Hillman Solutions Corp. — meaning it keeps 7. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: POOL leads at 11. 0% versus 5. 1% for SITE. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MSM leads at 40. 8%, 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 POOL or SITE or FERG or MSM 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 SiteOne Landscape Supply, Inc. 's 6. 72x. 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 27. 9x for SiteOne Landscape Supply, Inc. — 14. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for HLMN: 78. 1% to $14. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — HLMN or POOL or SITE or FERG or MSM?
In this comparison, MSM (3.
3% yield), POOL (2. 6% yield), FERG (1. 0% yield) pay a dividend. HLMN, SITE do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is HLMN or POOL or SITE or FERG or MSM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, MSC Industrial Direct Co.
, Inc. (MSM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 85), 3. 3% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MSM: +87. 3%, HLMN: -19. 9%), 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 POOL and SITE and FERG and MSM?
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: HLMN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; POOL is a small-cap deep-value stock; SITE is a small-cap quality compounder stock; FERG is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; MSM is a small-cap income-oriented stock. POOL, FERG, MSM 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.