Ibstock (IBST) Competitors

Ibstock has lower revenue, but higher earnings than Acacia Mining. Ibstock is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Acacia Mining, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Acacia Mining has a net margin of 0.00% compared to Ibstock's net margin of -6.67%. Acacia Mining's return on equity of 0.00% beat Ibstock's return on equity.

In the previous week, Ibstock had 5 more articles in the media than Acacia Mining. MarketBeat recorded 5 mentions for Ibstock and 0 mentions for Acacia Mining. Acacia Mining's average media sentiment score of 0.00 beat Ibstock's score of -0.27 indicating that Acacia Mining is being referred to more favorably in the media.

57.7% of Ibstock shares are owned by institutional investors. 2.3% of Ibstock shares are owned by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that large money managers, endowments and hedge funds believe a stock is poised for long-term growth.

Ibstock has a consensus price target of GBX 100, indicating a potential upside of 33.16%. Given Ibstock's stronger consensus rating and higher possible upside, analysts plainly believe Ibstock is more favorable than Acacia Mining.

Ibstock currently has a consensus price target of GBX 100, indicating a potential upside of 33.16%. CRH has a consensus price target of £105.90, indicating a potential upside of 9,115.91%. Given CRH's stronger consensus rating and higher possible upside, analysts clearly believe CRH is more favorable than Ibstock.

CRH has a net margin of 8.86% compared to Ibstock's net margin of -6.67%. CRH's return on equity of 10.79% beat Ibstock's return on equity.

In the previous week, Ibstock had 1 more articles in the media than CRH. MarketBeat recorded 5 mentions for Ibstock and 4 mentions for CRH. CRH's average media sentiment score of 0.01 beat Ibstock's score of -0.27 indicating that CRH is being referred to more favorably in the news media.

57.7% of Ibstock shares are owned by institutional investors. Comparatively, 59.2% of CRH shares are owned by institutional investors. 2.3% of Ibstock shares are owned by company insiders. Comparatively, 0.3% of CRH shares are owned by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that large money managers, hedge funds and endowments believe a company will outperform the market over the long term.

Ibstock pays an annual dividend of GBX 3 per share and has a dividend yield of 4.0%. CRH pays an annual dividend of GBX 148 per share and has a dividend yield of 128.8%. Ibstock pays out -52.6% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. CRH pays out 26.9% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Both companies have healthy payout ratios and should be able to cover their dividend payments with earnings for the next several years.

CRH has higher revenue and earnings than Ibstock. Ibstock is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than CRH, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Ibstock has a beta of 0.844, meaning that its stock price is 16% less volatile than the broader market. Comparatively, CRH has a beta of 1.241, meaning that its stock price is 24% more volatile than the broader market.

Ibstock pays an annual dividend of GBX 3 per share and has a dividend yield of 4.0%. Marshalls pays an annual dividend of GBX 6.70 per share and has a dividend yield of 3.8%. Ibstock pays out -52.6% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Marshalls pays out 83.8% of its earnings in the form of a dividend, suggesting it may not have sufficient earnings to cover its dividend payment in the future. Ibstock is clearly the better dividend stock, given its higher yield and lower payout ratio.

Marshalls has a net margin of 3.18% compared to Ibstock's net margin of -6.67%. Marshalls' return on equity of 3.79% beat Ibstock's return on equity.

57.7% of Ibstock shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 63.3% of Marshalls shares are held by institutional investors. 2.3% of Ibstock shares are held by company insiders. Comparatively, 1.3% of Marshalls shares are held by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that hedge funds, endowments and large money managers believe a company is poised for long-term growth.

In the previous week, Ibstock had 5 more articles in the media than Marshalls. MarketBeat recorded 5 mentions for Ibstock and 0 mentions for Marshalls. Marshalls' average media sentiment score of 0.00 beat Ibstock's score of -0.27 indicating that Marshalls is being referred to more favorably in the news media.

Ibstock has a beta of 0.844, meaning that its stock price is 16% less volatile than the broader market. Comparatively, Marshalls has a beta of 1.268, meaning that its stock price is 27% more volatile than the broader market.

Ibstock presently has a consensus target price of GBX 100, indicating a potential upside of 33.16%. Marshalls has a consensus target price of GBX 255.75, indicating a potential upside of 46.81%. Given Marshalls' stronger consensus rating and higher possible upside, analysts plainly believe Marshalls is more favorable than Ibstock.

Marshalls has higher revenue and earnings than Ibstock. Ibstock is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Marshalls, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Ibstock pays an annual dividend of GBX 3 per share and has a dividend yield of 4.0%. Forterra pays an annual dividend of GBX 6.20 per share and has a dividend yield of 3.9%. Ibstock pays out -52.6% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Forterra pays out 68.1% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Both companies have healthy payout ratios and should be able to cover their dividend payments with earnings for the next several years. Ibstock is clearly the better dividend stock, given its higher yield and lower payout ratio.

Ibstock presently has a consensus price target of GBX 100, indicating a potential upside of 33.16%. Forterra has a consensus price target of GBX 190.25, indicating a potential upside of 20.26%. Given Ibstock's higher probable upside, equities analysts plainly believe Ibstock is more favorable than Forterra.

Forterra has a net margin of 5.09% compared to Ibstock's net margin of -6.67%. Forterra's return on equity of 7.98% beat Ibstock's return on equity.

In the previous week, Ibstock had 1 more articles in the media than Forterra. MarketBeat recorded 5 mentions for Ibstock and 4 mentions for Forterra. Forterra's average media sentiment score of -0.09 beat Ibstock's score of -0.27 indicating that Forterra is being referred to more favorably in the news media.

Ibstock has a beta of 0.844, indicating that its share price is 16% less volatile than the broader market. Comparatively, Forterra has a beta of 0.728, indicating that its share price is 27% less volatile than the broader market.

Forterra has higher revenue and earnings than Ibstock. Ibstock is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Forterra, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

57.7% of Ibstock shares are owned by institutional investors. Comparatively, 80.4% of Forterra shares are owned by institutional investors. 2.3% of Ibstock shares are owned by company insiders. Comparatively, 0.5% of Forterra shares are owned by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that hedge funds, endowments and large money managers believe a company is poised for long-term growth.