Medical - Devices
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
UFPT vs CPAC vs CX vs PFBC vs MLM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Construction Materials
Construction Materials
Banks - Regional
Construction Materials
UFPT vs CPAC vs CX vs PFBC vs MLM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Devices | Construction Materials | Construction Materials | Banks - Regional | Construction Materials |
| Market Cap | $1.71B | $904M | $1.90B | $1.15B | $36.22B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $603M | $2.08B | $16.18B | $499M | $6.55B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $68M | $222M | $963M | $134M | $2.53B |
| Gross Margin | 28.3% | 37.6% | 31.4% | 55.0% | 29.6% |
| Operating Margin | 15.3% | 19.5% | 10.0% | 38.0% | 22.7% |
| Forward P/E | 23.3x | 8.3x | 16.3x | 8.9x | 30.8x |
| Total Debt | $154M | $1.51B | $7.65B | $384M | $5.32B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $20M | $73M | $1.82B | $807M | $67M |
UFPT vs CPAC vs CX vs PFBC vs MLM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| UFP Technologies, I… (UFPT) | 100 | 489.6 | +389.6% |
| Cementos Pacasmayo … (CPAC) | 100 | 157.9 | +57.9% |
| CEMEX, S.A.B. de C.… (CX) | 100 | 547.5 | +447.5% |
| Preferred Bank (PFBC) | 100 | 252.1 | +152.1% |
| Martin Marietta Mat… (MLM) | 100 | 312.7 | +212.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: UFPT vs CPAC vs CX vs PFBC vs MLM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
UFPT is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 19.5%, EPS growth 15.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 19.4%
- 7.9% 10Y total return vs PFBC's 256.1%
- 19.5% revenue growth vs PFBC's -4.1%
CPAC has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in value and stability.
- Lower P/E (8.3x vs 30.8x), PEG 1.00 vs 3.00
- Beta 0.13 vs CX's 1.17
CX is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if dividends and momentum is your priority.
- 6.7% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs MLM's 0.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
- +106.1% vs UFPT's +0.8%
PFBC is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 5 yrs, beta 0.69, yield 3.1%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.69, Low D/E 48.6%, current ratio 149.60x
- PEG 0.51 vs MLM's 3.00
- Beta 0.69, yield 3.1%, current ratio 149.60x
MLM ranks third and is worth considering specifically for quality and efficiency.
- 38.7% margin vs CX's 6.0%
- 13.3% ROA vs PFBC's 1.8%, ROIC 7.6% vs 13.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 19.5% revenue growth vs PFBC's -4.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (8.3x vs 30.8x), PEG 1.00 vs 3.00 | |
| Quality / Margins | 38.7% margin vs CX's 6.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.13 vs CX's 1.17 | |
| Dividends | 6.7% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs MLM's 0.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +106.1% vs UFPT's +0.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.3% ROA vs PFBC's 1.8%, ROIC 7.6% vs 13.5% |
UFPT vs CPAC vs CX vs PFBC vs MLM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
UFPT vs CPAC vs CX vs PFBC vs MLM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
PFBC leads in 1 of 6 categories
CX leads 1 • UFPT leads 1 • CPAC leads 0 • MLM leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
PFBC leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CX is the larger business by revenue, generating $16.2B annually — 32.4x PFBC's $499M. MLM is the more profitable business, keeping 38.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CX's 6.0%. On growth, CPAC holds the edge at +10.9% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $603M | $2.1B | $16.2B | $499M | $6.6B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $116M | $464M | $2.9B | $191M | $2.1B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $68M | $222M | $963M | $134M | $2.5B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $79M | $286M | $1.0B | $167M | $1.0B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +28.3% | +37.6% | +31.4% | +55.0% | +29.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +15.3% | +19.5% | +10.0% | +38.0% | +22.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +11.3% | +10.7% | +6.0% | +26.8% | +38.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +13.1% | +13.7% | +6.2% | +33.4% | +15.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +3.4% | +10.9% | +9.2% | — | +0.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +6.7% | +13.3% | -84.3% | +24.0% | +12.2% |
Valuation Metrics
CX leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 2.0x trailing earnings, CX trades at a 94% valuation discount to MLM's 31.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), PFBC offers better value at 0.52x vs MLM's 3.12x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.7B | $904M | $1.9B | $1.2B | $36.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.8B | $1.3B | $7.7B | $730M | $41.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 25.24x | 16.04x | 1.99x | 9.10x | 31.95x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 23.31x | 8.25x | 16.32x | 8.91x | 30.75x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.67x | 1.95x | — | 0.52x | 3.12x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 15.91x | 8.31x | 2.66x | 3.85x | 19.21x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.83x | 1.58x | 0.12x | 2.31x | 5.54x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 4.08x | 2.60x | 0.14x | 1.54x | 3.62x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 21.62x | 12.18x | 1.89x | 6.92x | 37.04x |
Profitability & Efficiency
UFPT leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MLM delivers a 25.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $25 in annual profit, vs $7 for CX. UFPT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.36x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CPAC's 1.24x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CPAC scores 8/9 vs PFBC's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +17.4% | +16.1% | +7.1% | +17.3% | +25.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +10.5% | +6.6% | +3.4% | +1.8% | +13.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +12.7% | +11.0% | +6.3% | +13.5% | +7.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +16.1% | +15.4% | +7.5% | +4.4% | +8.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.36x | 1.24x | 0.56x | 0.49x | 0.53x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $134M | $1.4B | $5.8B | -$423M | $5.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $20M | $73M | $1.8B | $807M | $67M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $154M | $1.5B | $7.6B | $384M | $5.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 9.42x | 4.54x | 2.29x | 0.88x | 6.44x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — UFPT and CPAC and CX each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in UFPT five years ago would be worth $40,607 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $15,444 for CX. Over the past 12 months, CX leads with a +106.1% total return vs UFPT's +0.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CPAC at 31.5% vs MLM's 15.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -0.9% | +4.0% | +13.8% | +0.4% | -5.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +0.8% | +103.4% | +106.1% | +20.9% | +13.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +55.3% | +127.6% | +103.2% | +126.1% | +53.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +306.1% | +95.2% | +54.4% | +56.6% | +62.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +785.4% | +89.0% | +107.0% | +256.1% | +242.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +15.8% | +31.5% | +26.7% | +31.3% | +15.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CPAC and CX each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CPAC is the less volatile stock with a 0.13 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CX's 1.17 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CX currently trades 96.1% from its 52-week high vs UFPT's 80.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.01x | 0.13x | 1.17x | 0.69x | 0.87x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $274.93 | $11.50 | $13.67 | $103.05 | $710.97 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $173.88 | $5.42 | $6.17 | $79.60 | $532.80 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +80.5% | +92.7% | +96.1% | +91.9% | +84.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 63.9 | 45.6 | 70.6 | 59.1 | 51.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 203K | 37K | 6.3M | 102K | 485K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — CX and MLM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: UFPT as "Buy", CPAC as "Hold", CX as "Buy", PFBC as "Buy", MLM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 34.6% upside for UFPT (target: $298) vs 4.0% for CX (target: $14). For income investors, CX offers the higher dividend yield at 6.72% vs MLM's 0.54%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $298.00 | $12.80 | $13.66 | $102.00 | $695.30 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 8 | 23 | 10 | 40 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +5.5% | +6.7% | +3.1% | +0.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 11 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $2.04 | $0.88 | $2.98 | $3.26 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +8.1% | +1.2% |
PFBC leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). CX leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 3 tied.
UFPT vs CPAC vs CX vs PFBC vs MLM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is UFPT or CPAC or CX or PFBC or MLM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, UFP Technologies, Inc.
(UFPT) is the stronger pick with 19. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -4. 1% for Preferred Bank (PFBC). CEMEX, S. A. B. de C. V. (CX) offers the better valuation at 2. 0x trailing P/E (16. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate UFP Technologies, Inc. (UFPT) a "Buy" — based on 2 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 — UFPT or CPAC or CX or PFBC or MLM?
On trailing P/E, CEMEX, S.
A. B. de C. V. (CX) is the cheapest at 2. 0x versus Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. at 31. 9x. On forward P/E, Cementos Pacasmayo S. A. A. is actually cheaper at 8. 3x — 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: Preferred Bank wins at 0. 51x versus Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. 's 3. 00x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — UFPT or CPAC or CX or PFBC or MLM?
Over the past 5 years, UFP Technologies, Inc.
(UFPT) delivered a total return of +306. 1%, compared to +54. 4% for CEMEX, S. A. B. de C. V. (CX). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: UFPT returned +785. 4% versus CPAC's +89. 0%. 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 — UFPT or CPAC or CX or PFBC or MLM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Cementos Pacasmayo S.
A. A. (CPAC) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 13β versus CEMEX, S. A. B. de C. V. 's 1. 17β — meaning CX is approximately 826% more volatile than CPAC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, UFP Technologies, Inc. (UFPT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 36% versus 124% for Cementos Pacasmayo S. A. A. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — UFPT or CPAC or CX or PFBC or MLM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), UFP Technologies, Inc.
(UFPT) is pulling ahead at 19. 5% versus -4. 1% for Preferred Bank (PFBC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: CEMEX, S. A. B. de C. V. grew EPS 982. 0% year-over-year, compared to -42. 0% for Martin Marietta Materials, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, UFPT leads at 19. 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 — UFPT or CPAC or CX or PFBC or MLM?
Preferred Bank (PFBC) is the more profitable company, earning 26.
8% net margin versus 6. 0% for CEMEX, S. A. B. de C. V. — meaning it keeps 26. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: PFBC leads at 38. 0% versus 10. 0% for CX. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — PFBC leads at 55. 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 UFPT or CPAC or CX or PFBC or MLM 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, Preferred Bank (PFBC) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 51x versus Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. 's 3. 00x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Cementos Pacasmayo S. A. A. (CPAC) trades at 8. 3x forward P/E versus 30. 8x for Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. — 22. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for UFPT: 34. 6% to $298. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — UFPT or CPAC or CX or PFBC or MLM?
In this comparison, CX (6.
7% yield), CPAC (5. 5% yield), PFBC (3. 1% yield), MLM (0. 5% yield) pay a dividend. UFPT does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is UFPT or CPAC or CX or PFBC or MLM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Cementos Pacasmayo S.
A. A. (CPAC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 13), 5. 5% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CPAC: +89. 0%, CX: +107. 0%), 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 UFPT and CPAC and CX and PFBC and MLM?
These companies operate in different sectors (UFPT (Healthcare) and CPAC (Basic Materials) and CX (Basic Materials) and PFBC (Financial Services) and MLM (Basic Materials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: UFPT is a small-cap high-growth stock; CPAC is a small-cap deep-value stock; CX is a small-cap deep-value stock; PFBC is a small-cap deep-value stock; MLM is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. CPAC, CX, PFBC, MLM pay a dividend while UFPT does 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.