Armstrong Flooring Inc's Competitiveness
A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of Armstrong Flooring Inc (AFI) against its publicly traded competitors: sales growth, net income, profitability, valuation and market share, plus each peer's market capitalization, revenue, income and employees. Free below: the top 5 peers. Subscriber access adds the full competitor list and CSV downloads.
Key Findings: Armstrong Flooring Inc vs Its Competitors
- TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 650M vs 13,671M combined for its competitors (4.5% combined share).
- Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is holding steady (+1.2% annualized vs trailing 12 months), vs holding steady (-1.8%) for its tracked peer group.
- Growth: Armstrong Flooring Inc generated 14.3% revenue growth year over year in Q4 2021, vs 6.5% for its competitors combined.
- Profitability: Its -22.9% net margin compares with 6.4% for the peer group.
- Peer revenue share: Armstrong Flooring Inc accounted for 4.7% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group, up from 4.4% a year earlier.
- Peer differentiation: Revenue per employee of $0.16M compares with $0.29M for the peer group (0.6x).
Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).
AFI Sales vs. its Competitors, Q4 2021
Armstrong Flooring Inc reported revenue growth of 14.25 % year on year in Q4 2021, above its competitors' combined revenue growth of 6.46 %.
With a net margin of -22.93 %, Armstrong Flooring Inc reported lower profitability than its competitors (6.35 %).
Armstrong Flooring Inc generated 4.67 % of the combined sales of its peer group, up from 4.37 % a year earlier.
API endpoints for this dataset
Armstrong Flooring Inc vs. its Competitors, Q4 2021
Revenue growth, year on year
Net margin
Revenue run-rate vs trailing 12 months
TTM net margin
TTM = trailing twelve months. Run-rate annualizes the latest quarter (×4) and compares it to TTM. In millions of $. High-Confidence Competitors are named as a competitor directly in Armstrong Flooring Inc reports; Similar-Size Competitors are the closest peers by market-cap rank within the same industry; Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors are the closest peers by combined revenue growth, operating margin and ROIC, all independent of the competitor list.
TTM revenue, latest-quarter run-rate and net income/margin benchmarked across Armstrong Flooring Inc and its 4 competitor groupings. Available under Commercial License.
| Entity | TTM Revenue | Rev Run-rate vs TTM |
|---|---|---|
| Armstrong Flooring Inc | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Competitors combined | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| High-Confidence Competitors (2) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar Growth & Profitability (7) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
TTM revenue, run-rate and net margin benchmarking across Armstrong Flooring Inc's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.
For context: the Chemicals - Plastics & Rubber industry grew revenue -1.0% year over year, combined, vs 14.3% for Armstrong Flooring Inc. Armstrong Flooring Inc's share of combined industry revenue moved from 0.33% to 0.38%, a gain of 0.05 percentage points.
Armstrong Flooring Inc's Competitor Quality Breadth
Group definitions: see Methodology: Performance Group Definitions.
| Entity | Profitable | Expanding | Above Industry Growth | Distressed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Armstrong Flooring Inc | No | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Competitors combined (5) | ||||
| High-Confidence Competitors (2) | ||||
| Similar Growth & Profitability (8) | 62.50 % (5 of 8) | 75.00 % (6 of 8) | 37.50 % (3 of 8) | 12.50 % (1 of 8) |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Altman Z-Score is not shown here: it is not populated in the underlying data for any company. Percentages are of companies in each group that report the relevant metric, not of the full group size.
AFI Stock Performance relative to its Competitors
AFI Stock Performance relative to High-Confidence Competitors
AFI Stock Performance relative to Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors
5 Best-Performing Tracked Competitors, Trailing 12 Months
| # | Competitor | TTM Share Price Return | vs U.S.A. 500 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Mohawk Industries Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 2 | Interface Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 3 | Live Ventures Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 4 | The Dixie Group Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
TTM share price return and U.S.A. 500 outperformance for Armstrong Flooring Inc's best-performing competitors requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months.
Armstrong Flooring Inc's Comment on Competition and Industry Peers
We face strong competition in all of our businesses. Principal attributes of competition include product performance, product styling, service and price. Competition in North America comes from both domestic and international manufacturers. Additionally, some of our products compete with alternative products or finishing solutions. Our resilient, laminate and wood flooring products compete with carpet, stone and ceramic products. There is excess industry capacity for certain products in some geographies, which tends to increase price competition. The following companies are our primary competitors:
Beaulieu International Group, N.V., Boa-Franc, Inc., Congoleum Corporation, Forbo Holding AG, Gerflor Group, IVC Group, Krono Holding AG, Lauzon Ltd, LG Floors, Mannington Mills, Inc., Mercier Wood Flooring, Inc., Metroflor Corporation, Mirage Hardwood Floors (a division of Boa-Franc Inc.), Mohawk Industries, Inc., Mullican Flooring, L.P., Nora Systems GmbH, Pfleiderer AG, Shaw Industries, Inc., Somerset Hardwood Flooring, and Tarkett AG.
Publicly Traded Peers of Armstrong Flooring Inc
Revenue and income for trailing 12 months, in millions of $, except employees| Company | Market Cap | Revenues |
|---|---|---|
 Armstrong Flooring Inc |
7.74 | 649.90 |
 Mohawk Industries Inc |
9,031.20 | 11,205.40 |
 Interface Inc |
1,792.02 | 1,440.86 |
 Tile shop holdings inc |
86.96 | 336.02 |
 Live Ventures Inc |
21.96 | 434.74 |
 The Dixie Group Inc |
5.00 | 253.86 |
| SUBTOTAL | 10,944.88 | 14,320.78 |
Sources: see Methodology: Peer & Competitor Identification, Sourcing.
Updated on:
Focus of this report: publicly traded companies. Ten additional tables on Armstrong Flooring Inc versus competitors, including market share analysis, are in the navigation menu under Competition. To download the tables, please subscribe.
Armstrong Flooring Inc's Competitors Named by the Company
Competitive relationships identified from Armstrong Flooring Inc reports and corroborating sources, each with a basis and confidence.| Competitor | Basis | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| Lauzon Ltd | Company report | 85% |
| Pfleiderer AG | Company report | 85% |
| IVC Group | Company report | 85% |
| Mohawk Industries | Company report | 85% |
| Forbo Holding AG | Company report | 85% |
| Metroflor Corporation | Company report | 85% |
| Shaw Industries | Company report | 85% |
| Beaulieu International Group | Company report | 85% |
| Krono Holding AG | Company report | 85% |
| Nora Systems GmbH | Company report | 85% |
| Gerflor Group | Company report | 85% |
| Boa-Franc Inc | Company report | 85% |
| Tarkett AG | Company report | 85% |
| Congoleum Corporation | Company report | 85% |
| Tile shop holdings inc | Company report | 85% |
| The Dixie Group Inc | Company report | 85% |
| Interface Inc | Company report | 85% |
Company report basis, confidence, active dates and source counts for Armstrong Flooring Inc's named competitors require a Commercial License.
Methodology: see Methodology: Peer & Competitor Identification, Sourcing.
Armstrong Flooring Inc's Business Segment Mix vs Peers
Revenue by operating segment or division, as named and reported by each company. Segment names are the filer's own and are not standardized across companies. Do not assume a same-named or similarly-named segment is defined identically between two companies. Shares are of each company's own total revenue and are not required to sum to 100% (intersegment revenue, unallocated items).| Company | Largest Segment |
|---|---|
| Mohawk Industries Inc | Global Ceramic 40.51 % |
| Interface Inc | AMS 59.16 % |
| Live Ventures Inc | Steel Manufacturing Segment 31.73 % |
| The Dixie Group Inc | Residential floorcovering products 98.89 % |
Source: operating segment revenue as reported in each company's reports (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API, leaf-level reportable segments only (parent roll-up segments are excluded where sub-segments are separately disclosed).
Armstrong Flooring Inc's Productivity vs Peers Comparison
Revenue and income per employee, trailing 12 months, in $; market cap in millions of $| Company | Market Cap | Revenue / Employee | Income / Employee |
|---|---|---|---|
| Armstrong Flooring Inc | 8 | 162,475 | -13,250 |
| Mohawk Industries Inc | 9,031 | 276,677 | 12,800 |
| Interface Inc | 1,792 | 403,603 | 40,771 |
| Tile shop holdings inc | 87 | 280,953 | -3,758 |
| Live Ventures Inc | 22 | 249,275 | -1,475 |
| The Dixie Group Inc | 5 | 266,940 | -5,088 |
| PEERS TOTAL | 10,937 | 285,042 | 13,595 |
Armstrong Flooring Inc's Geographic Revenue Exposure vs Peers
Revenue by country/region as reported in each company's most recent report. Disclosure granularity varies by filer (some report by country, others by broad region) and is shown as disclosed.| Company | Largest Market |
|---|---|
| Mohawk Industries Inc | United States 54.86 % |
| The Dixie Group Inc | United States 98.79 % |
Source: revenue geography as reported in each company's reports (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API. Percentages are of that company's own total consolidated revenue for its most recent reported period.
Armstrong Flooring Inc's Profitability & Cost Structure
Trailing 12-month margins from SEC-filed financials. Operating margin is compared to the Chemicals - Plastics & Rubber industry median; gross margin, EBITDA margin and capital intensity are compared to the live industry average (41 companies). See the full Chemicals - Plastics & Rubber industry profitability benchmarks.| Metric | Company | Industry | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 10.37 % | 16.59 % (avg) | -6.2 pp |
| Operating Margin | -6.28 % | industry median | -15.2 pp |
| EBITDA Margin | 0.23 % | 9.26 % (avg) | -9.0 pp |
| Capital Intensity (Capex / Revenue) | 3.17 % | 6.73 % (avg) | -3.6 pp |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. SG&A and R&D as a share of revenue have limited coverage as this data is backfilled and appear only where reported. Higher capital intensity is not inherently negative; it reflects the industry's asset requirements.
Armstrong Flooring Inc's Valuation vs Competitive Position
Valuation multiples vs the Chemicals - Plastics & Rubber industry average (41 companies, excluding loss-making/negative-equity outliers), alongside returns on capital for context on whether a premium or discount lines up with measurably stronger or weaker returns. See the full Chemicals - Plastics & Rubber industry valuation benchmarks.| Metric | Company | Industry Average | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| P/E | - | 40.4x | - |
| EV / EBITDA | 77.5x | 16.5x | +60.9x |
| P/B | 0.2x | 2.9x | -2.6x |
| Return on Equity | -23.96 % | industry aggregate | -45.68 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | -7.45 % | 2.00 % (avg) | -9.45 % |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. A valuation premium or discount is not, by itself, a judgment of over- or under-valuation. Compare it against the return and growth context shown elsewhere on this page.
Armstrong Flooring Inc's Multi-Year Financial Trajectory
Fiscal-year revenue growth, operating margin, return on invested capital and P/E, as reported in company reports.| Metric | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | -9.38 % | -13.99 % | -6.63 % | 11.13 % |
| Operating Margin | -1.69 % | -9.76 % | - | -6.28 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | -1.46 % | -7.76 % | - | -7.45 % |
| P/E | - | - | - | - |
Source: CSIMarket API, fiscal-year figures. P/E is this company's own historical ratio at each fiscal year end and can swing sharply around an earnings trough: that is real, not a data error.
Armstrong Flooring Inc's Strategic Group Map
Armstrong Flooring Inc is shown in red; its closest peers by combined growth, margin and ROIC are labeled. See Methodology: Strategic Group Map for how this chart is built.
Armstrong Flooring Inc's trailing-12-month revenue growth of 11.1% and operating margin of -6.3% compares with an average of 5.8% growth and 3.5% margin across its 8 closest peers by combined growth, margin and ROIC -- Armstrong Flooring Inc sits above that peer average on growth and below it on margin.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Extreme outlier values (from near-zero-revenue companies) are excluded from the plotted cloud but never from the highlighted company or its labeled peers.
Armstrong Flooring Inc's Competitive Forces (Porter's Five Forces)
Only the forces this data can support honestly are shown; the other three are marked as such rather than guessed.| Force | Assessment | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Barriers to Entry | Lower than typical for the industry | Capital intensity (capex / revenue) of 3.17 % vs industry average 6.73 % (see Profitability & Cost Structure above) |
Note: see Methodology: Porter's Five Forces. Supplier power and buyer power are covered on Armstrong Flooring Inc's dedicated Suppliers and Customers pages, not here.
Armstrong Flooring Inc's Industry Attractiveness & Competitive Strength
See Methodology: GE/McKinsey Matrix for how the two axes are built.
Armstrong Flooring Inc falls in the Low attractiveness / Low strength cell: Harvest / Divest.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Each axis score is a simple 1(low)/2(medium)/3(high) average across its three inputs -- a transparent, disclosed simplification, not a validated academic scoring model.
Armstrong Flooring Inc's SWOT
Every point below is a fixed rule applied to a metric already shown elsewhere on this page (Market Structure, Profitability, Valuation, Run-Rate, Stock Performance, Quality Breadth) not an independent strategic assessment. A blank quadrant means no rule was met, not that none apply.Strengths
No rule matched.
Weaknesses
- Operating margin 15.2 points below the industry median.
- Return on equity 45.7 points below the industry aggregate.
- Piotroski F-Score of 2 or below, the standard financial-distress signal.
Opportunities
No rule matched.
Threats
No rule matched.
Methodology: see Methodology: SWOT Analysis.
Armstrong Flooring Inc's Financial Strength vs Peers Comparison
Quick ratio, working capital, debt to equity and asset turnover, trailing 12 months| Company | Quick Ratio | Working Capital | Debt / Equity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Armstrong Flooring Inc | 0.07 | 1.22 | 0.34 |
| Mohawk Industries Inc | 0.28 | 2.03 | 0.23 |
| Interface Inc | 0.42 | 2.55 | 0.35 |
| Tile shop holdings inc | 0.27 | 1.49 | 0.05 |
| Live Ventures Inc | 0.10 | 1.54 | 0.73 |
| The Dixie Group Inc | 0.03 | 0.98 | 7.92 |
Quick ratio = cash / current liabilities; working capital ratio = current assets / current liabilities; asset turnover = revenue / total assets. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Armstrong Flooring Inc's Revenue and Income Growth vs Peers
Quarterly revenue and net income growth, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Revenue Y/Y | Income Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| Armstrong Flooring Inc | Q4 2021 | +14.2 % | - |
| Mohawk Industries Inc | Q3 2026 | +1.0 % | +49.9 % |
| Interface Inc | Q2 2026 | +5.5 % | +57.9 % |
| Tile shop holdings inc | Q4 2025 | -1.5 % | - |
| Live Ventures Inc | Q2 2026 | -3.0 % | - |
| The Dixie Group Inc | Q2 2026 | +0.1 % | -6.2 % |
| PEERS TOTAL | +1.8 % | +54.2 % |
Growth is shown only where both periods are positive. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Armstrong Flooring Inc's Peers' Costs of Sales and Capital Expenditures
Context for revenue growth: peer costs and capex, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Costs Y/Y | Capex Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| Armstrong Flooring Inc | Q4 2021 | +6.1 % | -40.8 % |
| Mohawk Industries Inc | Q3 2026 | -1.3 % | +6.0 % |
| Interface Inc | Q2 2026 | -4.1 % | +65.9 % |
| Tile shop holdings inc | Q4 2025 | +6.9 % | -41.0 % |
| Live Ventures Inc | Q2 2026 | -3.0 % | +59.0 % |
| The Dixie Group Inc | Q2 2026 | -0.4 % | +43.2 % |
Armstrong Flooring Inc's Returns and Turnover vs Peers
ROA, ROI and ROE (trailing 12 months), receivables and inventory turnover| Company | ROA | ROI | ROE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Armstrong Flooring Inc | - | - | - |
| Mohawk Industries Inc | 3.79% | 4.77% | 6.17% |
| Interface Inc | 11.61% | 13.45% | 22.61% |
| Tile shop holdings inc | - | - | - |
| Live Ventures Inc | - | - | - |
| The Dixie Group Inc | - | - | - |
ROA = net income / total assets; ROI = net income / investments; ROE = net income / equity; turnover ratios use trailing 12 month revenue (receivables) and cost of sales (inventory).
Armstrong Flooring Inc's Valuation vs Peers
P/E, price to sales, PEG, price to cash flow and price to book| Company | P/E | Price / Sales |
|---|---|---|
| Armstrong Flooring Inc | - | 0.01 |
| Mohawk Industries Inc | 17.69 | 0.81 |
| Interface Inc | 12.45 | 1.24 |
| Tile shop holdings inc | 6.56 | 0.26 |
| Live Ventures Inc | - | 0.05 |
| The Dixie Group Inc | - | 0.02 |
| PEERS AVERAGE | 18.27 | 0.76 |
P/E = price / diluted EPS (trailing 12 months); PEG = P/E divided by EPS growth; the average row divides the peers' combined market cap by their combined income, sales, cash flow and equity.