NOA vs TUSK: stock comparison and AI forecast
North American Construction Group Ltd. (NOA) and Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. (TUSK) compared on price performance, valuation, profitability and the daily AI forecast. · Alpha · vs market
Share
NOA North American Construction Group Ltd.
- Market Cap
- $272M
- P/E Ratio
- 7.6x
- Size
- small-cap
- AI Forecast
TUSK Mammoth Energy Services, Inc.
- Price
- $3.11 +32.3% · 6M
- Market Cap
- $150M
- P/E Ratio
- 8.4x
- Size
- small-cap
- AI Forecast
Which one does the AI model favor?
Intratio's model scores both stocks every trading day. Sign in to see their current direction; the exact ratings and forecasts come with a plan or a free follow slot.
Key facts
- NOA is 1.8 times larger than TUSK by market capitalization ($272M against $150M).
- NOA trades at 7.6 times trailing earnings, TUSK at 8.4 times.
- TUSK turns 67.1% of its revenue into net income, against 5.0% for NOA.
- NOA carries 2.99 times debt per unit of equity, against 0.30 times for TUSK.
- Both companies share the SEC industry classification Oil & Gas Field Services, NEC.
Fundamentals side by side
Trailing twelve months.
Valuation & Market
| Metric | NOA | TUSK |
|---|---|---|
| Market Cap | $272M | $150M |
| P/E Ratio | 7.61x | 8.41x |
| P/B Ratio | 0.82x | 0.57x |
| EPS | $1.24 | $0.37 |
| Book Value/Share | $11.54 | $5.46 |
| Revenue/Share | – | $0.42 |
| FCF/Share | – | $-2.97 |
Profitability & Margins
| Metric | NOA | TUSK |
|---|---|---|
| ROE | 11.4% | 5.1% |
| ROA | 2.9% | 3.9% |
| ROIC | 7.6% | -4.0% |
| Gross Margin | 15.0% | – |
| Operating Margin | 10.3% | -53.3% |
| Net Margin | 5.0% | 67.1% |
| EBT Margin | 6.9% | -29.4% |
| Tax Rate | 27.4% | -92.7% |
Financial Health
| Metric | NOA | TUSK |
|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio | 0.88x | 1.50x |
| Quick Ratio | 0.70x | 1.30x |
| D/E Ratio | 2.99x | 0.30x |
| Financial Leverage | 3.99x | 1.30x |
| Interest Coverage | 1.9x | -3.8x |
| Working Capital | -$35M | $36M |
Cash Flow
| Metric | NOA | TUSK |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash Flow | $165M | -$19M |
| Free Cash Flow | – | -$143M |
| Capital Spending | – | -$123M |
| OCF Growth YoY | 58.9% | -114.7% |
| FCF Growth YoY | – | -275.1% |
| FCF/Sales | – | -712.6% |
| CapEx/Sales | – | 615.7% |
Operational Efficiency
| Metric | NOA | TUSK |
|---|---|---|
| Asset Turnover | – | 0.06x |
| Receivables Turnover | – | 0.5x |
| Inventory Turnover | 9.6x | – |
| Fixed Assets Turnover | – | 0.1x |
| Days Sales Outstanding | – | 702 days |
| Days Inventory | 38 days | – |
| Payables Period | 51 days | – |
Income Statement
| Metric | NOA | TUSK |
|---|---|---|
| Total Revenue | – | $20M |
| Operating Income | $77M | -$11M |
| Net Income | $37M | $13M |
| SG&A Expense | – | $14M |
| Cost of Goods Sold | $522M | – |
Dividend & Shareholder Information
| Metric | NOA | TUSK |
|---|---|---|
| Shares Outstanding | 29M | 48M |
| EPS Growth | 37.7% | – |
NOA vs TUSK: stock comparison and AI forecast
Which is bigger, NOA or TUSK?
NOA is 1.8 times larger than TUSK by market capitalization ($272M against $150M).
Which is cheaper on earnings, NOA or TUSK?
NOA trades at 7.6 times trailing earnings, TUSK at 8.4 times.
Which one does Intratio's AI model rank higher, NOA or TUSK?
Intratio's model scores both stocks every trading day. Sign in to see their current direction; the exact ratings and forecasts come with a plan or a free follow slot.
This analysis is generated automatically using our proprietary AI systems and should not be considered personalized investment advice. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Always conduct your own research and consider consulting a financial advisor before making investment decisions.