Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to UFP Industries, Inc.
How UFP Industries, Inc. stacks up
UFPI · against 1,320 other Basic Materials companies
Valuation
68/ 100
Above the middle of the pack.
Ranked #417 of 1,321 · scores higher than 68% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score132 peers with a valuation score of 60–69, including UFPI · Click a bar to see the companies
Why valuation scores 68?
Weighted metrics compared with all Basic Materials companies.Mainly thanks to its free cash flow yield, EBITDA yield and earnings yield, which are stronger than most Basic Materials peers.
- higher earnings for the price paid: stronger than 61% of peers. Earnings yield: 5.6% vs peer median 3.6%
- more operating profit (EBITDA) for the company's total value: stronger than 64% of peers. EBITDA yield: 11.9% vs peer median 8.5%
- more free cash flow for the price paid: stronger than 68% of peers. Free cash flow yield: 6.0% vs peer median 2.6%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = UFPI, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | UFPI | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 1,281 reported | 5.4% | 3.8% | 61% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 1,352 reported | 11.2% | 8.6% | 64% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 409 reported | 6.0% | 2.6% | 68% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 1,275 reported | 67.8% | 61.0% | 54% | Context only |
Ranking by valuation score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around UFPI| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 577.1B KRW (≈$416M) | 100 | 66 | |
| 1 | 219M MYR (≈$48M) | 100 | 86 | |
| 1 | 63M MYR (≈$14M) | 100 | 68 | |
| 1 | 1.39T ARS (≈$1.4B) | 100 | 53 | |
| 1 | 224.2B CLP (≈$247M) | 100 | 47 | |
| 417 | 1.75T MXN (≈$94.4B) | 68 | 79 | |
| 417 |
Scores are sector-relative percentiles from the latest snapshot, always calculated against the whole sector: narrowing the comparison group changes who you compare with, not the scores. Missing metrics are left out and the remaining weights rescaled. How we score