Lennox International vs Owens Corning
Add, change or remove companies; up to four.
KIRA’s take AI analyst
I put Lennox International and Owens Corning side by side, using each one’s latest annual report. Here is what stands out:
- Owens Corning is the larger business, with $10.1B of revenue in fiscal 2025 against $5.2B for Lennox International, about 1.9 times as much.
- Owens Corning grew revenue faster (2.6%, against −2.7%).
- Lennox International kept more of each dollar of sales as operating profit (20.1% operating margin, against 3.6%).
- Lennox International turned more of its sales into free cash flow (12.3% FCF margin, against 9.5%).
- Lennox International earned a higher return on the capital invested in it (40.1%, against 1.9%).
Who comes out ahead
Of the 11 measures where higher (or lower) is clearly better, how many each company leads.
Lennox International
LII
8/11
Gross marginOperating marginNet marginFCF marginReturn on capitalReturn on equityPiotroski F-scoreNet debt / EBITDA
Owens Corning
OC
3/11
Revenue growth5-year growthShare count change
Side by side
Best in the row
| Latest fiscal year | LII FY25 | OC FY25 |
|---|---|---|
| Size | ||
| Market cap | $12.8B | $9.2B |
| Revenue | $5.2B | $10.1B |
| Free cash flow | $639M | $962M |
| Net income | $806M | −$522M |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth | −2.7% | 2.6% |
| 5-year growth | 7.4% | 7.5% |
| Share count change | −1.1% | −4.3% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 33.4% | 28.1% |
| Operating margin | 20.1% | 3.6% |
| Net margin | 15.5% | −5.2% |
| FCF margin | 12.3% | 9.5% |
| Return on capital | 40.1% | 1.9% |
| Return on equity | 75.8% | −11.7% |
| Balance sheet | ||
| Net debt | $1.4B | $4.8B |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.2x | 4.6x |
| Dividends and buybacks | $655M | $1.0B |
| Valuation & quality | ||
| P/E | 16.2x | — |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 4 |
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.