SHW Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

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 $377.02, signalling upside risk potential of 6.95%. On the other hand Paramount Gold Nevada has an analysts' consensus of $1.40 which suggests that it could grow by 190.34%. 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 1.246, which suggesting that the stock is 24.553% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Paramount Gold Nevada has a beta of 1.017, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 1.74%.

Sherwin-Williams has a quarterly dividend of $0.79 per share corresponding to a yield of 0.83%. 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 -$2M. Notably, Sherwin-Williams's price-to-earnings ratio is 33.32x 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 3.88x 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 $377.02, signalling upside risk potential of 6.95%. On the other hand RPM International has an analysts' consensus of $118.99 which suggests that it could grow by 9.39%. Given that RPM International has higher upside potential than Sherwin-Williams, analysts believe RPM International is more attractive than Sherwin-Williams.

Sherwin-Williams has a beta of 1.246, which suggesting that the stock is 24.553% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison RPM International has a beta of 1.080, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 7.976%.

Sherwin-Williams has a quarterly dividend of $0.79 per share corresponding to a yield of 0.83%. RPM International offers a yield of 1.83% 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 33.32x while RPM International's PE ratio is 21.80x. 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 3.88x versus 1.91x for RPM International. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Steel Dynamics has a net margin of 9.5% compared to Sherwin-Williams's net margin of 4.97%. Sherwin-Williams's return on equity of 68.4% beat Steel Dynamics's return on equity of 13%.

Sherwin-Williams has a consensus price target of $377.02, signalling upside risk potential of 6.95%. On the other hand Steel Dynamics has an analysts' consensus of $146.11 which suggests that it could grow by 11.39%. Given that Steel Dynamics has higher upside potential than Sherwin-Williams, analysts believe Steel Dynamics is more attractive than Sherwin-Williams.

Sherwin-Williams has a beta of 1.246, which suggesting that the stock is 24.553% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Steel Dynamics has a beta of 1.442, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 44.234%.

Sherwin-Williams has a quarterly dividend of $0.79 per share corresponding to a yield of 0.83%. Steel Dynamics offers a yield of 1.43% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.50 per share. Sherwin-Williams pays 26.98% of its earnings as a dividend. Steel Dynamics pays out 18.39% 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 Steel Dynamics quarterly revenues of $4.4B. Sherwin-Williams's net income of $503.9M is higher than Steel Dynamics's net income of $217.2M. Notably, Sherwin-Williams's price-to-earnings ratio is 33.32x while Steel Dynamics's PE ratio is 17.33x. 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 3.88x versus 1.17x for Steel Dynamics. 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 $377.02, signalling upside risk potential of 6.95%. On the other hand Solitario Resources has an analysts' consensus of $1.50 which suggests that it could grow by 138.85%. 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 1.246, which suggesting that the stock is 24.553% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Solitario Resources has a beta of 0.498, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 50.16%.

Sherwin-Williams has a quarterly dividend of $0.79 per share corresponding to a yield of 0.83%. 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 33.32x 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 3.88x versus -- for Solitario Resources. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.