Autoliv vs Mohawk Industries
Add, change or remove companies; up to four.
KIRA’s take AI analyst
I put Autoliv and Mohawk Industries side by side, using each one’s latest annual report. Here is what stands out:
- Autoliv is the larger business, with $10.8B of revenue in fiscal 2025 against $10.8B for Mohawk Industries.
- Autoliv grew revenue faster (4.1%, against −0.5%).
- Autoliv kept more of each dollar of sales as operating profit (10.1% operating margin, against 4.5%).
- Autoliv turned more of its sales into free cash flow (6.6% FCF margin, against 5.7%).
- Autoliv earned a higher return on the capital invested in it (20.3%, against 4.1%).
- Investors pay more for each dollar of Mohawk Industries’s earnings: a P/E of 16.3x against 13.9x for Autoliv.
Who comes out ahead
Of the 11 measures where higher (or lower) is clearly better, how many each company leads.
Autoliv
ALV
10/11
Revenue growth5-year growthOperating marginNet marginFCF marginReturn on capitalReturn on equityPiotroski F-scoreNet debt / EBITDAShare count change
Mohawk Industries
MHK
1/11
Gross margin
Side by side
Best in the row
| Latest fiscal year | ALV FY25 | MHK FY25 |
|---|---|---|
| Size | ||
| Market cap | $8.4B | $7.5B |
| Revenue | $10.8B | $10.8B |
| Free cash flow | $716M | $616M |
| Net income | $735M | $370M |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth | 4.1% | −0.5% |
| 5-year growth | 7.8% | 2.5% |
| Share count change | −4.4% | −1.9% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 19.2% | 23.9% |
| Operating margin | 10.1% | 4.5% |
| Net margin | 6.8% | 3.4% |
| FCF margin | 6.6% | 5.7% |
| Return on capital | 20.3% | 4.1% |
| Return on equity | 30.3% | 4.7% |
| Balance sheet | ||
| Net debt | $1.5B | $1.3B |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.0x | 1.1x |
| Dividends and buybacks | $589M | $150M |
| Valuation & quality | ||
| P/E | 13.9x | 16.3x |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 | 7 |
Ten years
Revenue
Operating margin
Free cash flow
Return on capital
Each company's latest fiscal year; fiscal years end in different months. The best value in each row is highlighted where higher (or lower) is clearly better. Not investment advice.