SN Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

BorgWarner has a net margin of 9.28% compared to SharkNinja's net margin of 6.79%. SharkNinja's return on equity of 22.41% beat BorgWarner's return on equity of 14.58%.

SharkNinja has a consensus price target of $121.69, signalling upside risk potential of 24.99%. On the other hand BorgWarner has an analysts' consensus of $41.24 which suggests that it could grow by 29.73%. Given that BorgWarner has higher upside potential than SharkNinja, analysts believe BorgWarner is more attractive than SharkNinja.

SharkNinja has a beta of 0.000, which suggesting that the stock is 100% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison BorgWarner has a beta of 1.200, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 19.974%.

SharkNinja has a quarterly dividend of $1.08 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. BorgWarner offers a yield of 1.38% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.11 per share. SharkNinja pays 350.42% of its earnings as a dividend. BorgWarner pays out 20.8% of its earnings as a dividend. BorgWarner's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future, but SharkNinja's is not.

SharkNinja quarterly revenues are $1.4B, which are smaller than BorgWarner quarterly revenues of $3.4B. SharkNinja's net income of $132.3M is lower than BorgWarner's net income of $234M. Notably, SharkNinja's price-to-earnings ratio is 38.18x while BorgWarner's PE ratio is 8.07x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for SharkNinja is 2.68x versus 0.51x for BorgWarner. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Crown Holdings has a net margin of 9.28% compared to SharkNinja's net margin of -5.69%. SharkNinja's return on equity of 22.41% beat Crown Holdings's return on equity of 3.35%.

SharkNinja has a consensus price target of $121.69, signalling upside risk potential of 24.99%. On the other hand Crown Holdings has an analysts' consensus of $95.65 which suggests that it could grow by 33.57%. Given that Crown Holdings has higher upside potential than SharkNinja, analysts believe Crown Holdings is more attractive than SharkNinja.

SharkNinja has a beta of 0.000, which suggesting that the stock is 100% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Crown Holdings has a beta of 0.860, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 14.033%.

SharkNinja has a quarterly dividend of $1.08 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Crown Holdings offers a yield of 1.21% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.25 per share. SharkNinja pays 350.42% of its earnings as a dividend. Crown Holdings pays out 25.56% of its earnings as a dividend. Crown Holdings's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future, but SharkNinja's is not.

SharkNinja quarterly revenues are $1.4B, which are smaller than Crown Holdings quarterly revenues of $3.1B. SharkNinja's net income of $132.3M is higher than Crown Holdings's net income of -$175M. Notably, SharkNinja's price-to-earnings ratio is 38.18x while Crown Holdings's PE ratio is 102.09x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for SharkNinja is 2.68x versus 0.84x for Crown Holdings. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

DraftKings has a net margin of 9.28% compared to SharkNinja's net margin of -26.81%. SharkNinja's return on equity of 22.41% beat DraftKings's return on equity of -43.02%.

SharkNinja has a consensus price target of $121.69, signalling upside risk potential of 24.99%. On the other hand DraftKings has an analysts' consensus of $51.25 which suggests that it could grow by 37.76%. Given that DraftKings has higher upside potential than SharkNinja, analysts believe DraftKings is more attractive than SharkNinja.

SharkNinja has a beta of 0.000, which suggesting that the stock is 100% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison DraftKings has a beta of 1.898, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 89.784%.

SharkNinja has a quarterly dividend of $1.08 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. DraftKings offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. SharkNinja pays 350.42% of its earnings as a dividend. DraftKings pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

SharkNinja quarterly revenues are $1.4B, which are larger than DraftKings quarterly revenues of $1.1B. SharkNinja's net income of $132.3M is higher than DraftKings's net income of -$293.7M. Notably, SharkNinja's price-to-earnings ratio is 38.18x while DraftKings's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for SharkNinja is 2.68x versus 3.93x for DraftKings. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

PulteGroup has a net margin of 9.28% compared to SharkNinja's net margin of 15.59%. SharkNinja's return on equity of 22.41% beat PulteGroup's return on equity of 26.7%.

SharkNinja has a consensus price target of $121.69, signalling upside risk potential of 24.99%. On the other hand PulteGroup has an analysts' consensus of $147.50 which suggests that it could grow by 35.45%. Given that PulteGroup has higher upside potential than SharkNinja, analysts believe PulteGroup is more attractive than SharkNinja.

SharkNinja has a beta of 0.000, which suggesting that the stock is 100% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison PulteGroup has a beta of 1.668, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 66.783%.

SharkNinja has a quarterly dividend of $1.08 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. PulteGroup offers a yield of 0.75% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.22 per share. SharkNinja pays 350.42% of its earnings as a dividend. PulteGroup pays out 5.47% of its earnings as a dividend. PulteGroup's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future, but SharkNinja's is not.

SharkNinja quarterly revenues are $1.4B, which are smaller than PulteGroup quarterly revenues of $4.5B. SharkNinja's net income of $132.3M is lower than PulteGroup's net income of $697.9M. Notably, SharkNinja's price-to-earnings ratio is 38.18x while PulteGroup's PE ratio is 8.03x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for SharkNinja is 2.68x versus 1.33x for PulteGroup. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.