SHW Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Friedman Industries has a net margin of 9.5% compared to Sherwin-Williams's net margin of 4.14%. Sherwin-Williams's return on equity of 68.4% beat Friedman Industries's return on equity of 4.71%.

Sherwin-Williams has a consensus price target of $377.24, signalling upside risk potential of 9.05%. On the other hand Friedman Industries has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could fall by --. Given that Sherwin-Williams has higher upside potential than Friedman Industries, analysts believe Sherwin-Williams is more attractive than Friedman Industries.

Sherwin-Williams has a beta of 1.183, which suggesting that the stock is 18.284% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Friedman Industries has a beta of 1.485, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 48.545%.

Sherwin-Williams has a quarterly dividend of $0.79 per share corresponding to a yield of 0.87%. Friedman Industries offers a yield of 0.97% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.04 per share. Sherwin-Williams pays 26.98% of its earnings as a dividend. Friedman Industries pays out 18.32% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Sherwin-Williams quarterly revenues are $5.3B, which are larger than Friedman Industries quarterly revenues of $129.2M. Sherwin-Williams's net income of $503.9M is higher than Friedman Industries's net income of $5.3M. Notably, Sherwin-Williams's price-to-earnings ratio is 32.70x while Friedman Industries's PE ratio is 19.24x. 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 Sherwin-Williams is 3.80x versus 0.26x for Friedman Industries. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Paramount Gold Nevada has a net margin of 9.5% compared to Sherwin-Williams's net margin of --. Sherwin-Williams's return on equity of 68.4% beat Paramount Gold Nevada's return on equity of --.

Sherwin-Williams has a consensus price target of $377.24, signalling upside risk potential of 9.05%. On the other hand Paramount Gold Nevada has an analysts' consensus of $1.40 which suggests that it could grow by 102.69%. Given that Paramount Gold Nevada has higher upside potential than Sherwin-Williams, analysts believe Paramount Gold Nevada is more attractive than Sherwin-Williams.

Sherwin-Williams has a beta of 1.183, which suggesting that the stock is 18.284% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Paramount Gold Nevada has a beta of 1.135, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 13.451%.

Sherwin-Williams has a quarterly dividend of $0.79 per share corresponding to a yield of 0.87%. Paramount Gold Nevada offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Sherwin-Williams pays 26.98% of its earnings as a dividend. Paramount Gold Nevada pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend. Sherwin-Williams's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Sherwin-Williams quarterly revenues are $5.3B, which are larger than Paramount Gold Nevada quarterly revenues of --. Sherwin-Williams's net income of $503.9M is higher than Paramount Gold Nevada's net income of -$2.6M. Notably, Sherwin-Williams's price-to-earnings ratio is 32.70x while Paramount Gold Nevada'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 Sherwin-Williams is 3.80x versus -- for Paramount Gold Nevada. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

RPM International has a net margin of 9.5% compared to Sherwin-Williams's net margin of 3.52%. Sherwin-Williams's return on equity of 68.4% beat RPM International's return on equity of 24.93%.

Sherwin-Williams has a consensus price target of $377.24, signalling upside risk potential of 9.05%. On the other hand RPM International has an analysts' consensus of $122.29 which suggests that it could grow by 7.93%. Given that Sherwin-Williams has higher upside potential than RPM International, analysts believe Sherwin-Williams is more attractive than RPM International.

Sherwin-Williams has a beta of 1.183, which suggesting that the stock is 18.284% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison RPM International has a beta of 1.036, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 3.604%.

Sherwin-Williams has a quarterly dividend of $0.79 per share corresponding to a yield of 0.87%. RPM International offers a yield of 1.76% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.51 per share. Sherwin-Williams pays 26.98% of its earnings as a dividend. RPM International pays out 39.41% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Sherwin-Williams quarterly revenues are $5.3B, which are larger than RPM International quarterly revenues of $1.5B. Sherwin-Williams's net income of $503.9M is higher than RPM International's net income of $52M. Notably, Sherwin-Williams's price-to-earnings ratio is 32.70x while RPM International's PE ratio is 22.71x. 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 Sherwin-Williams is 3.80x versus 1.99x for RPM International. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Solitario Resources has a net margin of 9.5% compared to Sherwin-Williams's net margin of --. Sherwin-Williams's return on equity of 68.4% beat Solitario Resources's return on equity of --.

Sherwin-Williams has a consensus price target of $377.24, signalling upside risk potential of 9.05%. On the other hand Solitario Resources has an analysts' consensus of $1.50 which suggests that it could grow by 125.6%. Given that Solitario Resources has higher upside potential than Sherwin-Williams, analysts believe Solitario Resources is more attractive than Sherwin-Williams.

Sherwin-Williams has a beta of 1.183, which suggesting that the stock is 18.284% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Solitario Resources has a beta of 0.465, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 53.534%.

Sherwin-Williams has a quarterly dividend of $0.79 per share corresponding to a yield of 0.87%. Solitario Resources offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Sherwin-Williams pays 26.98% of its earnings as a dividend. Solitario Resources pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend. Sherwin-Williams's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Sherwin-Williams quarterly revenues are $5.3B, which are larger than Solitario Resources quarterly revenues of --. Sherwin-Williams's net income of $503.9M is higher than Solitario Resources's net income of -$511K. Notably, Sherwin-Williams's price-to-earnings ratio is 32.70x while Solitario Resources'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 Sherwin-Williams is 3.80x versus -- for Solitario Resources. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.