Compare price, profitability, solvency, and SEC-reported financials side by side—before deciding which assumptions deserve a closer look.
Decision snapshot: HD stock price vs NWL: inconclusive Relative valuation is incomplete for this pair. Review the available filing metrics before drawing a conclusion.
Quick read
Each company valued on the other's multiple, then compared with the market price.
Implied fair value · at NWL's multiple
Needs NWL P/E.
Implied fair value · at HD's multiple
Needs Annual EPS is negative, HD P/E.
Price unavailable
Metric by metric
Where each company leads, and how wide the gap is.
Growth edge
Reported gross margin
Operating income + D&A
Lower is better
Not comparable
Lower leverage
Statements
Annual statements in reported currencies, with calculations and source evidence.
Values retain reported currencies and share bases. Select a figure to inspect its period, calculation and filing inputs. Differences require compatible units and periods.
Explore enterprise value and market valuation multiples in the valuation sections.
Trendline
Nine period-end years of reported revenue, earnings, and margins. Periods and currencies are shown with the data.
Price framework
USD market cap plus reported borrowing debt, less cash and equivalents. This EV proxy excludes investments, preferred stock and noncontrolling-interest adjustments.
Complete market value, debt and cash evidence is required for enterprise value.
Complete market value, debt and cash evidence is required for enterprise value.
Price framework
The same filing-backed model used on each company's valuation page, with company-specific inputs and calculated scenarios.
The Home Depot, Inc. · implied price per share
Bear
$86.60
Base
$109.07
Bull
$140.31
NEWELL BRANDS INC. · implied price per share
Bear
-$9.19
Base
-$9.00
Bull
-$8.67
Balance sheet health
Inspect reported liquidity and leverage alongside historical financial-health checks.
Financial strength on a 0–9 scale.
Bankruptcy-risk signal from balance sheet and earnings power.
Not enough data to score either balance sheet.
Comparable set
Where the pair sits against the wider comparable set.
Keep comparing
Open adjacent comparisons from the same industry to pressure-test the read across multiple pairs.
LOWES COMPANIES INC
HD vs LOW
FASTENAL CO
HD vs FAST
W.W. GRAINGER, INC.
HD vs GWW
STANLEY BLACK & DECKER, INC.
HD vs SWK
WHIRLPOOL CORP /DE/
HD vs WHR
TRACTOR SUPPLY CO /DE/
HD vs TSCO
PROCTER & GAMBLE Co
HD vs PG
COLGATE PALMOLIVE CO
HD vs CL
INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORP
HD vs IBM
CLOROX CO /DE/
HD vs CLX
ESTEE LAUDER COMPANIES INC
HD vs EL
Cash excludes investments. EBITDA is an operating-income-plus-D&A proxy. Missing borrowing categories remain unavailable; select a value to inspect its inputs.
LLM-powered synthesis
An explanation of the financial evidence. Check its snapshot date against the figures above.
This explanation uses an earlier data snapshot or evidence version. Review its generation date and the current figures, or refresh after signing in.
If you believe HD deserves a premium multiple because its profitability, growth, and ROIC remain structurally stronger than NWL’s, then maintain or add to HD because NWL-based implied downside is driven by an unsuitable comparison rather than weak operating performance.
The valuation gap is very large: HD trades at $331.96 versus an implied price of $54.74 on the P/S basis, suggesting -83.5% downside from the comparison framework. That discount appears driven by NWL-multiple setup rather than HD’s own fundamentals, since HD’s revenue, profitability, and return profile are far superior to NWL’s.
Supporting Metrics
