Methodology · I — Comparable Companies
Pool Corporation (POOL)
Data as of 4 May 2026 · Industrials · Industrial - Distribution · NASDAQ · USD
Overview
This report presents a valuation of Pool Corporation (POOL) through the application of the Comparable Companies Analysis methodology. The analysis utilizes publicly available financial data for Pool Corporation and a selected peer group to derive valuation multiples. The objective is to establish an indicative valuation range for Pool Corporation's equity.
Methodology
The Comparable Companies Analysis involves identifying publicly traded companies with business characteristics similar to Pool Corporation. Enterprise Value (EV) and Equity Value multiples are calculated for these comparable companies, and the observed ranges are then applied to Pool Corporation's relevant financial metrics. This approach provides a market-based perspective on valuation, reflecting current investor sentiment for similar businesses.
Peer set rationale
The peer set for Pool Corporation comprises FLUIDRA, HAYWARD, and ALLEGION. These entities operate within related industrial distribution and specialty manufacturing sectors, exhibiting business models and end-markets that bear a degree of comparability to Pool Corporation. However, it is noted that only three peers were supplied, which is fewer than the five to ten typically recommended for a robust comparable companies analysis.
Warranted EV/EBITDA — ROIC × Growth
| ROIC ↓ / g → | 0% | 2% | 4% | 6% | 8% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4% | 9.1× | 5.9× | — | — | — |
| 8% | 9.1× | 8.8× | 8.2× | 6.8× | — |
| 12% | 9.1× | 9.8× | 11.0× | 13.7× | 27.4× |
| 16% | 9.1× | 10.3× | 12.3× | 17.1× | 41.1× |
| 20% | 9.1× | 10.6× | 13.1× | 19.2× | 49.3× |
Value-creation map — ROIC − WACC vs. growth
Peer multiples
| TICKER | COMPANY | EV | EV/EBITDA | EV/REVENUE | P/E | P/FCF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FLUIDRA | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| HAYWARD | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| ALLEGION | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| POOL ✱ | Pool Corporation | 9.60b | 15.1× | 1.8× | 19.0× | 12.8× |
Distribution across peers
| MULTIPLE | N | MIN | P25 | MEDIAN | MEAN | P75 | MAX |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EV/EBITDA | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV/Revenue | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/E | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/FCF | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
Implied valuation range
Implied prices use the target's shares outstanding (37.1m). Enterprise-side multiples are bridged to equity using the target's net debt and minority interest.
| MULTIPLE | BASIS | EQUITY LOW | EQUITY MID | EQUITY HIGH | PX LOW | PX MID | PX HIGH |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EV/EBITDA | enterprise | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV/Revenue | enterprise | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/E | equity | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/FCF | equity | — | — | — | — | — | — |
Multiples discussion
An examination of the selected valuation multiples reveals that no positive observations were recorded for EV/EBIT, EV/EBITDA, EV/(EBITDA-MCX), EV/Revenue, P/E, or P/FCF across the peer group. Consequently, median or quartile statistics for these multiples cannot be presented, as there were no positive comparable data points from which to derive them. This absence of positive multiples indicates a significant data limitation within the current peer set for deriving a valuation range. A comprehensive valuation based on these multiples is therefore not feasible at this juncture.
Implied range — narrative
Due to the absence of positive comparable multiples across all examined metrics, including EV/EBIT, EV/EBITDA, EV/(EBITDA-MCX), EV/Revenue, P/E, and P/FCF, no implied valuation ranges for Pool Corporation could be established. The inability to calculate median or quartile statistics for any multiple precludes the derivation of an indicative share price range based on this methodology. Further data acquisition or a revised peer selection would be necessary to generate meaningful implied valuation ranges.
Outliers, premium and discount
Given that no positive multiples were observed for any of the valuation metrics across the peer group, the identification or analysis of outliers is not applicable in this instance. Similarly, the assessment of a premium or discount for Pool Corporation relative to its peers cannot be performed without a basis of comparable valuation multiples. All available peer data were considered without silent exclusion.
Quality checks
Items requiring analyst review
- ·equity_method_investments_m: Carrying value; mark to peer P/B in the EV bridge.
- ·share_options_and_exercise_prices: FMP does not provide this in a comparable-ready format
- ·free_float_and_significant_shareholdings: FMP does not provide this in a comparable-ready format
- ·minority_interest_market_value: FMP does not provide this in a comparable-ready format
- ·associates_and_jvs_market_value: FMP does not provide this in a comparable-ready format
- ·pension_deficit_or_surplus: FMP does not provide this in a comparable-ready format
- ·operating_lease_present_value: FMP does not provide this in a comparable-ready format
- ·true_exceptional_or_extraordinary_items: FMP does not provide this in a comparable-ready format
- ·pro_forma_acquisition_disposal_adjustments: FMP does not provide this in a comparable-ready format
- ·broker_consensus_forecasts: FMP does not provide this in a comparable-ready format
- ·EV bridge: Minority interest = 0.
- ·EV bridge: Pension: No pension deficit reported by data layer; bridge contribution = 0.
- ·EV bridge: Operating leases: No operating-lease data available; bridge contribution = 0.
- ·EV bridge: Associates: Associates stripped at carrying value 1.5m (no peer P/B or P/E available for mark-to-market).
- ·EV bridge: Preference shares: No preference shares outstanding.
- ·EV bridge: Convertibles: No convertible debt reported.
- ·EV bridge: Finance leases: 343.6m added (already debt-like).
Closing note
This analysis provides a preliminary assessment of Pool Corporation utilizing the Comparable Companies methodology, subject to the significant data limitations identified. The absence of positive valuation multiples from the current peer set prevents the derivation of an indicative valuation range at this time. Further work, including the expansion of the peer group or the acquisition of more granular financial data, is recommended to yield a more robust and complete valuation.
Specialist modes Greenblatt v2 · sanity checks
Three optional cross-checks: a conservative liquidation floor (Net-Net + 30c PP&E), a merger-arbitrage spread analyser, and a stub-recap leverage amplifier. Each runs against the same FMP snapshot used by the main engine.
This document is produced by the Marlowe Keynes Valuation Engine for illustrative and analytical purposes. It does not constitute investment advice, an offer, or a solicitation. Any judgment, classification, or selection requiring analyst discretion is flagged as REVIEW and must be adjudicated by a qualified analyst.