Residential Construction
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
MHO vs SKY vs TMHC vs GRBK vs CCS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Residential Construction
Residential Construction
Residential Construction
Residential Construction
MHO vs SKY vs TMHC vs GRBK vs CCS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Residential Construction | Residential Construction | Residential Construction | Residential Construction | Residential Construction |
| Market Cap | $3.35B | $4.05B | $5.56B | $2.83B | $1.58B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $4.36B | $2.64B | $7.61B | $2.10B | $3.99B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $360M | $214M | $672M | $313M | $133M |
| Gross Margin | 22.2% | 26.3% | 22.4% | 30.5% | 18.4% |
| Operating Margin | 10.4% | 9.8% | 13.2% | 19.5% | 5.9% |
| Forward P/E | 9.9x | 19.4x | 11.2x | 11.0x | 14.5x |
| Total Debt | $1.09B | $131M | $2.36B | $335M | $1.44B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $689M | $610M | $851M | $191M | $158M |
MHO vs SKY vs TMHC vs GRBK vs CCS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| M/I Homes, Inc. (MHO) | 100 | 388.3 | +288.3% |
| Champion Homes, Inc. (SKY) | 100 | 295.0 | +195.0% |
| Taylor Morrison Hom… (TMHC) | 100 | 307.7 | +207.7% |
| Green Brick Partner… (GRBK) | 100 | 613.8 | +513.8% |
| Century Communities… (CCS) | 100 | 184.5 | +84.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: MHO vs SKY vs TMHC vs GRBK vs CCS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
MHO ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +19.3% vs SKY's -16.3%
SKY is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 22.7%, EPS growth 35.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 4.0%
- 22.7% revenue growth vs CCS's -6.4%
TMHC has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in sleep-well-at-night and valuation efficiency.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.92, Low D/E 37.4%, current ratio 6.24x
- PEG 0.34 vs MHO's 0.80
- Lower P/E (11.2x vs 14.5x)
- Beta 0.92 vs CCS's 1.23, lower leverage
GRBK is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding and defensive is your priority.
- 7.4% 10Y total return vs SKY's 7.1%
- Beta 1.06, yield 0.1%, current ratio 8.47x
- 14.9% margin vs CCS's 3.3%
- 13.0% ROA vs CCS's 2.9%, ROIC 15.4% vs 7.2%
CCS is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 5 yrs, beta 1.23, yield 2.1%
- 2.1% yield, 5-year raise streak, vs GRBK's 0.1%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 22.7% revenue growth vs CCS's -6.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (11.2x vs 14.5x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 14.9% margin vs CCS's 3.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.92 vs CCS's 1.23, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.1% yield, 5-year raise streak, vs GRBK's 0.1%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +19.3% vs SKY's -16.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.0% ROA vs CCS's 2.9%, ROIC 15.4% vs 7.2% |
MHO vs SKY vs TMHC vs GRBK vs CCS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
MHO vs SKY vs TMHC vs GRBK vs CCS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
TMHC leads in 2 of 6 categories
GRBK leads 1 • SKY leads 1 • CCS leads 1 • MHO leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
GRBK leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TMHC is the larger business by revenue, generating $7.6B annually — 3.6x GRBK's $2.1B. GRBK is the more profitable business, keeping 14.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CCS's 3.3%. On growth, SKY holds the edge at +1.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $4.4B | $2.6B | $7.6B | $2.1B | $4.0B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $471M | $306M | $1.0B | $415M | $258M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $360M | $214M | $672M | $313M | $133M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $199M | $260M | $710M | $208M | $132M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +22.2% | +26.3% | +22.4% | +30.5% | +18.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +10.4% | +9.8% | +13.2% | +19.5% | +5.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +8.2% | +8.1% | +8.8% | +14.9% | +3.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +4.6% | +9.9% | +9.3% | +9.9% | +3.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -5.4% | +1.8% | -26.8% | -2.6% | -12.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -35.9% | -3.0% | -51.2% | -22.9% | -33.3% |
Valuation Metrics
TMHC leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 7.7x trailing earnings, TMHC trades at a 64% valuation discount to SKY's 21.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), TMHC offers better value at 0.23x vs SKY's 0.78x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $3.4B | $4.1B | $5.6B | $2.8B | $1.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $3.7B | $3.6B | $7.1B | $3.0B | $2.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 8.82x | 21.43x | 7.65x | 9.29x | 11.22x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 9.88x | 19.44x | 11.22x | 10.98x | 14.48x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.71x | 0.78x | 0.23x | 0.36x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 7.12x | 12.69x | 6.18x | 7.19x | 7.13x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.76x | 1.63x | 0.68x | 1.35x | 0.38x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.12x | 2.76x | 0.95x | 1.49x | 0.64x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 27.75x | 21.29x | 6.88x | 13.60x | 12.73x |
Profitability & Efficiency
SKY leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
GRBK delivers a 17.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $17 in annual profit, vs $5 for CCS. SKY carries lower financial leverage with a 0.08x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CCS's 0.56x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), SKY scores 7/9 vs GRBK's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +11.4% | +13.4% | +10.8% | +17.0% | +5.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +7.5% | +10.1% | +6.9% | +13.0% | +2.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +11.3% | +16.9% | +11.0% | +15.4% | +7.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +11.4% | +14.8% | +13.2% | +19.1% | +9.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 7 | 4 | 4 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.34x | 0.08x | 0.37x | 0.17x | 0.56x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $397M | -$479M | $1.5B | $144M | $1.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $689M | $610M | $851M | $191M | $158M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.1B | $131M | $2.4B | $335M | $1.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 6.68x | 51.32x | 19.94x | — | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — MHO and GRBK each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in GRBK five years ago would be worth $25,408 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $7,415 for CCS. Over the past 12 months, MHO leads with a +19.3% total return vs SKY's -16.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MHO at 24.5% vs CCS's -4.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +1.7% | -13.7% | +1.1% | +3.9% | -7.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +19.3% | -16.3% | +2.0% | +10.5% | +4.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +93.1% | -2.6% | +37.4% | +31.2% | -12.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +76.7% | +64.0% | +85.7% | +154.1% | -25.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +599.0% | +714.5% | +321.2% | +742.1% | +233.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +24.5% | -0.9% | +11.2% | +9.5% | -4.5% |
Risk & Volatility
TMHC leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
TMHC is the less volatile stock with a 0.92 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CCS's 1.23 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. TMHC currently trades 82.0% from its 52-week high vs CCS's 71.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.07x | 0.96x | 0.92x | 1.06x | 1.23x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $158.92 | $99.17 | $72.50 | $80.97 | $76.00 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $103.52 | $59.44 | $54.58 | $56.85 | $50.42 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +81.8% | +73.9% | +82.0% | +81.1% | +71.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 54.8 | 46.0 | 49.0 | 47.0 | 39.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 226K | 500K | 1.1M | 200K | 243K |
Analyst Outlook
CCS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: MHO as "Hold", SKY as "Buy", TMHC as "Buy", GRBK as "Hold", CCS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 44.7% upside for SKY (target: $106) vs 11.3% for CCS (target: $61). CCS is the only dividend payer here at 2.10% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $165.00 | $106.00 | $73.75 | — | $60.67 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 10 | 8 | 30 | 11 | 11 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +0.1% | +2.1% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 5 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $0.07 | $1.14 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +6.0% | +2.0% | +6.9% | +3.0% | +9.1% |
TMHC leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Risk & Volatility). GRBK leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 1 tied.
MHO vs SKY vs TMHC vs GRBK vs CCS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is MHO or SKY or TMHC or GRBK or CCS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Champion Homes, Inc.
(SKY) is the stronger pick with 22. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -6. 4% for Century Communities, Inc. (CCS). Taylor Morrison Home Corporation (TMHC) offers the better valuation at 7. 7x trailing P/E (11. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Champion Homes, Inc. (SKY) a "Buy" — based on 8 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 — MHO or SKY or TMHC or GRBK or CCS?
On trailing P/E, Taylor Morrison Home Corporation (TMHC) is the cheapest at 7.
7x versus Champion Homes, Inc. at 21. 4x. On forward P/E, M/I Homes, Inc. is actually cheaper at 9. 9x — 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: Taylor Morrison Home Corporation wins at 0. 34x versus M/I Homes, Inc. 's 0. 80x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — MHO or SKY or TMHC or GRBK or CCS?
Over the past 5 years, Green Brick Partners, Inc.
(GRBK) delivered a total return of +154. 1%, compared to -25. 9% for Century Communities, Inc. (CCS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GRBK returned +742. 1% versus CCS's +233. 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 — MHO or SKY or TMHC or GRBK or CCS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Taylor Morrison Home Corporation (TMHC) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
92β versus Century Communities, Inc. 's 1. 23β — meaning CCS is approximately 33% more volatile than TMHC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Champion Homes, Inc. (SKY) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 8% versus 56% for Century Communities, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — MHO or SKY or TMHC or GRBK or CCS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Champion Homes, Inc.
(SKY) is pulling ahead at 22. 7% versus -6. 4% for Century Communities, Inc. (CCS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Champion Homes, Inc. grew EPS 35. 2% year-over-year, compared to -53. 3% for Century Communities, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, GRBK leads at 6. 1% 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 — MHO or SKY or TMHC or GRBK or CCS?
Green Brick Partners, Inc.
(GRBK) is the more profitable company, earning 14. 9% net margin versus 3. 6% for Century Communities, Inc. — meaning it keeps 14. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: GRBK leads at 19. 5% versus 9. 2% for CCS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — GRBK leads at 30. 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 MHO or SKY or TMHC or GRBK or CCS 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, Taylor Morrison Home Corporation (TMHC) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 34x versus M/I Homes, Inc. 's 0. 80x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, M/I Homes, Inc. (MHO) trades at 9. 9x forward P/E versus 19. 4x for Champion Homes, Inc. — 9. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for SKY: 44. 7% to $106. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — MHO or SKY or TMHC or GRBK or CCS?
In this comparison, CCS (2.
1% yield) pays a dividend. MHO, SKY, TMHC, GRBK do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is MHO or SKY or TMHC or GRBK or CCS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Champion Homes, Inc.
(SKY) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 96), +714. 5% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (SKY: +714. 5%, TMHC: +321. 2%), 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 MHO and SKY and TMHC and GRBK and CCS?
Both stocks operate in the Consumer Cyclical sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: MHO is a small-cap deep-value stock; SKY is a small-cap high-growth stock; TMHC is a small-cap deep-value stock; GRBK is a small-cap deep-value stock; CCS is a small-cap deep-value stock. CCS pays a dividend while MHO, SKY, TMHC, GRBK 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.