In the dynamic landscape of industrial machinery, two notable players, Hillenbrand, Inc. (HI) and Columbus McKinnon Corporation (CMCO), stand out for their innovative approaches and market strategies. Both companies operate within the industrial sector but cater to different niches—Hillenbrand with its diverse offerings in process solutions and funeral services, while Columbus McKinnon specializes in intelligent motion solutions for material handling. This article will delve into their strengths and market positions to help you determine which company may be the most compelling investment opportunity.
Table of contents
Company Overview
Hillenbrand, Inc. Overview
Hillenbrand, Inc. operates as a diversified industrial company, focusing on process and material handling solutions across various sectors. Founded in 1906 and based in Batesville, Indiana, the company is structured into three primary segments: Advanced Process Solutions, Molding Technology Solutions, and Batesville. Its Advanced Process Solutions segment specializes in designing and manufacturing equipment for industries such as food, pharmaceuticals, and chemicals. The Molding Technology Solutions segment provides advanced injection molding and extrusion equipment, while the Batesville segment offers funeral services products, including burial and cremation caskets. With a market cap of approximately $2.24B, Hillenbrand demonstrates a robust presence in the industrial machinery sector.
Columbus McKinnon Corporation Overview
Founded in 1875 and headquartered in Buffalo, New York, Columbus McKinnon Corporation designs and manufactures intelligent motion solutions to facilitate the ergonomic movement, lifting, and securing of materials globally. The company’s offerings include a wide range of hoists, crane systems, and rigging equipment, serving diverse market verticals such as transportation, energy, and life sciences. With a market cap of around $472M, Columbus McKinnon emphasizes innovation in material handling solutions, leveraging technology to provide efficient and safe operations for its clients.
Key similarities and differences
Both Hillenbrand and Columbus McKinnon operate within the industrial sector, focusing on machinery and solutions for material handling. However, Hillenbrand’s product offerings are more diversified, including funeral services, while Columbus McKinnon specializes exclusively in motion and lifting solutions. Their business models reflect different market focuses, with Hillenbrand catering to a broader range of industries compared to the more niche approach of Columbus McKinnon.
Income Statement Comparison
The following table presents a comparative analysis of the most recent income statements for Hillenbrand, Inc. and Columbus McKinnon Corporation, allowing investors to evaluate their financial performance.
| Metric | Hillenbrand, Inc. | Columbus McKinnon Corporation |
|---|---|---|
| Market Cap | 2.24B | 472.29M |
| Revenue | 2.67B | 963.03M |
| EBITDA | 230.6M | 75.11M |
| EBIT | 92.1M | 26.92M |
| Net Income | 43.1M | -5.14M |
| EPS | 0.74 | -0.18 |
| Fiscal Year | 2025 | 2024 |
Interpretation of Income Statement
In 2025, Hillenbrand, Inc. reported a revenue decline from previous years, indicating potential challenges in maintaining market share, while also registering a net income of 43.1M. Columbus McKinnon Corporation, on the other hand, experienced a decrease in revenue and reported a net loss of 5.14M, highlighting volatility in profitability. Although Hillenbrand’s EBITDA margin remains relatively stable, Columbus McKinnon’s margins have contracted, suggesting increased operational pressures. Overall, both companies face distinct challenges in a competitive landscape, making careful assessment crucial for potential investors.
Financial Ratios Comparison
In this section, I present a comparative analysis of key financial ratios for Company A (Hillenbrand, Inc. – HI) and Company B (Columbus McKinnon Corporation – CMCO) based on the most recent data available.
| Metric | Hillenbrand, Inc. (HI) | Columbus McKinnon Corporation (CMCO) |
|---|---|---|
| ROE | 3.66% | -0.58% |
| ROIC | -32.60% | 3.60% |
| P/E | 36.69 | -94.69 |
| P/B | 1.34 | 0.55 |
| Current Ratio | 1.22 | 1.81 |
| Quick Ratio | 0.88 | 1.04 |
| D/E | 1.12 | 0.61 |
| Debt-to-Assets | 35.86% | 31.09% |
| Interest Coverage | 0.55 | 1.68 |
| Asset Turnover | 0.60 | 0.55 |
| Fixed Asset Turnover | 7.80 | 9.07 |
| Payout ratio | 121.69% | -156.52% |
| Dividend yield | 3.32% | 1.65% |
Interpretation of Financial Ratios
Hillenbrand, Inc. shows a strong dividend yield of 3.32% and a better price-to-book ratio compared to Columbus McKinnon. However, its return on equity (ROE) is low, indicating potential profitability issues. On the other hand, CMCO has a healthier debt-to-equity ratio and stronger asset turnover, but it struggles with negative P/E and payout ratios, reflecting financial challenges. Investors should weigh these factors carefully, as both companies exhibit strengths and weaknesses that could impact long-term performance.
Dividend and Shareholder Returns
Hillenbrand, Inc. (HI) offers dividends with a yield of 3.32% and a payout ratio of 121.69%, indicating potential sustainability concerns. The company is also engaged in share buybacks, which can enhance shareholder value but may also lead to risks if funded through debt.
On the other hand, Columbus McKinnon Corporation (CMCO) does not currently pay dividends, reflecting a strategy focused on reinvestment and growth, although it has initiated share buybacks. This approach, while prioritizing expansion, requires careful monitoring to ensure it aligns with long-term shareholder value creation.
Strategic Positioning
Hillenbrand, Inc. (HI) holds a market cap of $2.24B and is recognized for its diversified industrial offerings, particularly in process solutions, giving it a competitive edge in various sectors. Columbus McKinnon Corporation (CMCO), with a market cap of $472M, focuses on intelligent motion solutions, positioning itself as a key player in material handling. Both companies face competitive pressure from technological advancements and market fluctuations, necessitating strategic innovations to maintain their market shares.
Stock Comparison
In this section, I will analyze the stock price movements of Hillenbrand, Inc. (HI) and Columbus McKinnon Corporation (CMCO) over the past year, highlighting key trading dynamics and price variations.
Trend Analysis
Hillenbrand, Inc. (HI) Over the past year, HI has experienced a significant price decline of -29.48%, indicating a bearish trend. The stock has shown notable volatility with a standard deviation of 9.44. Throughout this period, the highest price reached was 50.29, while the lowest was 18.75. Currently, the trend appears to be accelerating downward, which may suggest further challenges ahead for investors.
Columbus McKinnon Corporation (CMCO) CMCO has also faced a substantial price drop of -55.48% over the past year, confirming a bearish trend as well. This stock is exhibiting even higher volatility with a standard deviation of 11.26. The highest price noted was 44.9, in contrast to a low of 12.96. Similar to HI, CMCO’s trend is accelerating downward, indicating a potentially tougher landscape for stakeholders.
In conclusion, both companies are currently in a bearish trend with significant price declines and increasing volatility, which warrants careful consideration for investors.
Analyst Opinions
Recent analyst recommendations for Hillenbrand, Inc. (HI) and Columbus McKinnon Corporation (CMCO) both indicate a “B+” rating. Analysts suggest a cautious buy for HI, citing strong discounted cash flow and price-to-book scores. For CMCO, the same rating applies, with emphasis on its robust cash flow potential. Despite solid fundamentals, both companies face challenges in return on equity. The consensus for 2025 remains a cautious buy, as analysts weigh growth prospects against market conditions.
Stock Grades
In the current investment landscape, understanding stock ratings can significantly impact your trading decisions. Below are the latest grades for two companies, Hillenbrand, Inc. (HI) and Columbus McKinnon Corporation (CMCO), as assessed by recognized grading firms.
Hillenbrand, Inc. Grades
| Grading Company | Action | New Grade | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| DA Davidson | maintain | Neutral | 2025-11-20 |
| DA Davidson | maintain | Neutral | 2025-10-16 |
| CJS Securities | downgrade | Market Perform | 2025-10-16 |
| Keybanc | downgrade | Sector Weight | 2025-05-08 |
| DA Davidson | maintain | Neutral | 2025-05-01 |
| DA Davidson | maintain | Neutral | 2024-11-15 |
| Keybanc | maintain | Overweight | 2024-11-14 |
| DA Davidson | downgrade | Neutral | 2024-08-12 |
| DA Davidson | maintain | Buy | 2021-02-08 |
| DA Davidson | maintain | Buy | 2021-02-07 |
Columbus McKinnon Corporation Grades
| Grading Company | Action | New Grade | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| DA Davidson | downgrade | Neutral | 2025-02-11 |
| DA Davidson | maintain | Buy | 2024-02-05 |
| DA Davidson | maintain | Buy | 2022-10-04 |
| DA Davidson | maintain | Buy | 2022-10-03 |
| Barrington Research | maintain | Outperform | 2022-07-29 |
| Barrington Research | maintain | Outperform | 2022-07-28 |
| JP Morgan | downgrade | Neutral | 2022-05-26 |
| Barrington Research | maintain | Outperform | 2022-05-26 |
| Barrington Research | maintain | Outperform | 2022-05-25 |
| JP Morgan | downgrade | Neutral | 2022-05-25 |
Overall, the grades for Hillenbrand reflect a cautious stance with several downgrades over the past year, indicating some challenges in performance. In contrast, Columbus McKinnon has maintained a more favorable outlook, despite a recent downgrade, which suggests a mixed sentiment among analysts. As always, I recommend considering these ratings as part of a broader analysis before making investment decisions.
Target Prices
The consensus target prices indicate strong expectations from analysts for both Hillenbrand, Inc. and Columbus McKinnon Corporation.
| Company | Target High | Target Low | Consensus |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hillenbrand, Inc. (HI) | 32 | 32 | 32 |
| Columbus McKinnon Corporation (CMCO) | 50 | 48 | 49 |
Hillenbrand, Inc. has a target consensus of 32, closely matching its current price of 31.84. Columbus McKinnon’s consensus of 49 suggests a potential upside from its current price of 16.44, reflecting more optimistic analyst sentiment.
Strengths and Weaknesses
The following table outlines the strengths and weaknesses of Hillenbrand, Inc. (HI) and Columbus McKinnon Corporation (CMCO) based on the most recent data.
| Criterion | Hillenbrand, Inc. (HI) | Columbus McKinnon Corporation (CMCO) |
|---|---|---|
| Diversification | Strong presence in multiple sectors | Focused on industrial machinery |
| Profitability | Moderate net profit margin (1.95%) | Currently negative net profit margin (-0.53%) |
| Innovation | Advanced technology in processing solutions | Intelligent motion solutions |
| Global presence | Operations in multiple countries | Primarily North America-focused |
| Market Share | Moderate within industrial sector | Smaller, niche market share |
| Debt level | High debt-to-equity ratio (1.12) | Lower debt-to-equity ratio (0.61) |
In summary, Hillenbrand showcases strong diversification and innovation, but faces profitability challenges and high debt levels. Columbus McKinnon, while focused and innovative, struggles with profitability and has less market presence.
Risk Analysis
In this section, I will provide a comparative analysis of the potential risks associated with two companies, Hillenbrand, Inc. (HI) and Columbus McKinnon Corporation (CMCO). Below is a table outlining various risk metrics for each company.
| Metric | Hillenbrand, Inc. (HI) | Columbus McKinnon Corporation (CMCO) |
|---|---|---|
| Market Risk | Medium | Medium |
| Regulatory Risk | High | Medium |
| Operational Risk | Medium | High |
| Environmental Risk | Medium | Low |
| Geopolitical Risk | Low | Medium |
The most significant risks for both companies involve regulatory and operational aspects. Hillenbrand faces heightened regulatory scrutiny, particularly due to its diverse industrial operations, while Columbus McKinnon is vulnerable to operational disruptions affecting its manufacturing processes.
Investors should be aware of these risks, particularly in light of recent regulatory changes that may impact both industries significantly. Effective risk management strategies will be crucial for navigating these uncertainties.
Which one to choose?
When comparing Hillenbrand, Inc. (HI) and Columbus McKinnon Corporation (CMCO), both companies hold a “B+” rating, indicating solid fundamentals. HI reported a market cap of 1.91B with a recent revenue of 2.67B, while CMCO has a market cap of 0.49B and revenue of 0.96B. HI’s net profit margin is at 1.6%, albeit with a bearish stock trend that has seen a 29.5% decline over the past year. CMCO exhibits a steeper drop of 55.5% but shows a recent recovery of 13.9%.
For growth-focused investors, HI may be preferable due to its larger revenue base and improving cash flow metrics. However, conservative investors seeking stability might find CMCO’s lower valuation ratios more appealing, despite its higher volatility.
Both companies face risks related to market dependence and competition, which could impact future performance.
Disclaimer: This article is not financial advice. Each investor is responsible for their own investment decisions.
Go further
I encourage you to read the complete analyses of Hillenbrand, Inc. and Columbus McKinnon Corporation to enhance your investment decisions:
