Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co's Competitiveness
A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co (HMHC) 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: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co vs Its Competitors
- TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 1,051M vs 3,422M combined for tracked competitors (23.5% combined share).
- Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is decelerating (-31.9% annualized vs trailing 12 months), vs accelerating (+35.7%) for its tracked peer group.
- Growth: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co generated -12.2% revenue growth year over year in Q4 2021, vs 11.1% for its tracked competitors combined.
- Profitability: Its -27.1% net margin compares with 7.0% for the peer group.
- Peer revenue share: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co accounted for 13.4% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group, down from 16.3% a year earlier.
- Peer differentiation: Revenue per employee of $0.34M compares with $0.29M for the peer group (1.2x).
Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).
HMHC Sales vs. its Competitors, Q4 2021
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co reported revenue contraction of 12.16 % year on year in Q4 2021, below its competitors' combined revenue growth of 11.06 %.
With a net margin of -27.08 %, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co reported lower profitability than its competitors (6.96 %).
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co generated 13.35 % of the combined sales of its peer group, down from 16.30 % a year earlier.
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co 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 an SEC filing; 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 Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co and its 4 competitor groupings. Available under Commercial License.
| Entity | TTM Revenue | Rev Run-rate vs TTM |
|---|---|---|
| Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Competitors combined | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| High-Confidence Competitors (1) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar Growth & Profitability (5) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
TTM revenue, run-rate and net margin benchmarking across Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.
For context: the Publishing & Information industry grew revenue 4.0% year over year, combined, vs -12.2% for Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co's share of combined industry revenue moved from 1.31% to 1.10%, a loss of 0.20 percentage points.
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co's Competitor Quality Breadth
Share of each group, trailing 12 months: profitable (net margin > 0), expanding (revenue growth > 0), growing faster than the industry's own median, and financially distressed (Piotroski F-Score of 2 or below).
| Entity | Profitable | Expanding | Above Industry Growth | Distressed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co | Yes | Yes | Yes | No |
| Competitors combined (4) | ||||
| High-Confidence Competitors (2) | ||||
| Similar Growth & Profitability (8) | 62.50 % (5 of 8) | 37.50 % (3 of 8) | 25.00 % (2 of 8) | 42.90 % (3 of 7) |
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.
HMHC Stock Performance relative to its Competitors
HMHC Stock Performance relative to High-Confidence Competitors
HMHC 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 | Scholastic Corporation | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 2 | John Wiley and Sons Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
TTM share price return and U.S.A. 500 outperformance for Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co's best-performing tracked competitors requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months.
Publicly Traded Peers of Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co
Revenue and income for trailing 12 months, in millions of $, except employees| Company | Market Cap | Revenues |
|---|---|---|
| Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co | 2,763.40 | 1,050.88 |
| John Wiley and Sons Inc | 2,423.92 | 1,666.09 |
| Scholastic Corporation | 664.52 | 1,573.10 |
| Steel Connect Inc | 323.43 | 183.25 |
| Pcs Edventures Inc | 13.55 | 5.67 |
| SUBTOTAL | 6,188.83 | 4,478.99 |
Sources: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co's official press releases and regulatory filings; CSIMarket.com's market research; and the financial filings and press releases of the other companies cited.
Updated on:
Focus of this report: publicly traded companies. Ten additional tables on Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co versus competitors, including market share analysis, are in the navigation menu under Competition. To download the tables, please subscribe.
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co's Competitors Named by the Company
Competitive relationships identified from SEC filings and corroborating sources, each with a basis and confidence.| Competitor | Basis | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| Stride Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Mcgraw Hill Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| John Wiley and Sons Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Scholastic Corporation | Named by the company | 85% |
Filing basis, confidence, active dates and source counts for Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co's named competitors require a Commercial License.
Methodology: relationships are extracted from SEC filings (named-competitor disclosures) and corroborating sources. Named by the company = explicitly disclosed as a competitor; Inferred = derived from corroborating signals. Confidence reflects evidence strength.
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co'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 |
|---|---|
| John Wiley and Sons Inc | Research 67.40 % |
| Scholastic Corporation | Book Fairs 34.43 % |
Source: operating segment revenue as reported in each company's SEC filings (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).
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co'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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co | 2,763 | 338,993 | 68,896 |
| John Wiley and Sons Inc | 2,424 | 370,242 | 44,042 |
| Scholastic Corporation | 665 | 227,820 | 8,197 |
| Steel Connect Inc | 323 | 407,231 | 190,909 |
| Pcs Edventures Inc | 14 | - | - |
| PEERS TOTAL | 3,425 | 289,170 | 28,729 |
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co's Geographic Revenue Exposure vs Peers
Revenue by country/region as reported in each company's most recent filing. Disclosure granularity varies by filer (some report by country, others by broad region) and is shown as disclosed.| Company | Largest Market |
|---|---|
| Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co | US 96.04 % |
| John Wiley and Sons Inc | United States 50.97 % |
| Scholastic Corporation | United States 75.72 % |
| Steel Connect Inc | China 34.18 % |
Source: revenue geography as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API. Percentages are of that company's own total consolidated revenue for its most recent reported period.
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co's Profitability & Cost Structure
Trailing 12-month margins from SEC-filed financials. Operating margin is compared to the Publishing & Information industry median; gross margin, EBITDA margin and capital intensity are compared to the live industry average (24 companies). See the full Publishing & Information industry profitability benchmarks.| Metric | Company | Industry | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 18.79 % | 50.84 % (avg) | -32.0 pp |
| Operating Margin | 4.58 % | industry median | -1.5 pp |
| EBITDA Margin | 20.98 % | 4.29 % (avg) | +16.7 pp |
| Capital Intensity (Capex / Revenue) | 3.72 % | 2.81 % (avg) | +0.9 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.
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co's Valuation vs Competitive Position
Valuation multiples vs the Publishing & Information industry average (24 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 Publishing & Information industry valuation benchmarks.| Metric | Company | Industry Average | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| P/E | 9.9x | 15.1x | -5.2x |
| EV / EBITDA | 10.0x | 12.9x | -2.9x |
| P/B | 8.3x | 2.5x | +5.8x |
| Return on Equity | 83.73 % | industry aggregate | 73.21 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | 2.89 % | 9.05 % (avg) | -6.16 % |
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.
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co's Multi-Year Financial Trajectory
Fiscal-year revenue growth, operating margin, return on invested capital and P/E, as reported in SEC filings.| Metric | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | 3.19 % | -3.06 % | 2.54 % | 30.81 % | -25.75 % | -25.95 % | 1.81 % |
| Operating Margin | -8.20 % | -22.64 % | -8.07 % | -4.92 % | -11.71 % | -42.69 % | 4.58 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | -2.79 % | -9.20 % | -3.95 % | -3.24 % | -6.00 % | -25.57 % | 2.89 % |
| P/E | - | - | - | - | - | - | 9.9x |
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.
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co's Strategic Group Map
Every company in Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co's industry and named-competitor list, plotted by trailing 12-month revenue growth and operating margin. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co is shown in red; its closest peers by combined growth, margin and ROIC (the Similar Growth & Profitability group above) are labeled.
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.
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co'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 | High (capital intensive) | Capital intensity (capex / revenue) of 3.72 % vs industry average 2.81 % (see Profitability & Cost Structure above) |
| Supplier Power | Not covered on this page | See Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co's dedicated suppliers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Buyer Power | Not covered on this page | See Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co's dedicated customers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Threat of Substitutes | - | No systematic data source for cross-product substitution exists in this system; not estimated |
Note: this is a partial, data-grounded application of the framework, not a complete strategic assessment. Rivalry and barriers-to-entry readings are mechanical translations of the HHI and capital-intensity figures shown elsewhere on this page, not independent judgments.
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co's Industry Attractiveness & Competitive Strength
A CSIMarket composite, not a standard field: each axis is an equal-weighted average of three factors already shown elsewhere on this page (industry growth, industry profitability and rivalry for attractiveness; relative market share, profitability and growth vs industry for strength). Disclosed as a designed methodology, not a precision measurement.
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co falls in the Low attractiveness / High strength cell: Selective.
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.
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co'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
- Return on equity 73.2 points above the industry aggregate.
Weaknesses
- Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is decelerating (-31.9% annualized vs trailing 12 months).
Opportunities
- A meaningful share of tracked competitors (50.00 %) show financial-distress signals, a possible opening to gain share.
Threats
- High capital intensity requires continuous reinvestment just to keep pace with the industry.
Methodology: mechanical, rule-based SWOT. Each bullet reuses a figure already sourced and cited elsewhere on this page; nothing here is generated narrative or independent analyst judgment.
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co'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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co | 0.55 | 1.28 | 1.56 |
| John Wiley and Sons Inc | 0.12 | 0.59 | 1.17 |
| Scholastic Corporation | 0.19 | 1.21 | 0.16 |
| Steel Connect Inc | 3.46 | 4.09 | 0.07 |
| Pcs Edventures Inc | 7.15 | 14.12 | - |
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.
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co'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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co | Q4 2021 | -12.2 % | - |
| John Wiley and Sons Inc | Q2 2026 | -2.6 % | - |
| Scholastic Corporation | Q3 2026 | -3.9 % | - |
| Steel Connect Inc | Q3 2024 | +24.1 % | -46.7 % |
| Pcs Edventures Inc | Q2 2026 | -28.2 % | -83.2 % |
| PEERS TOTAL | -4.0 % | - |
Growth is shown only where both periods are positive. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co'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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co | Q4 2021 | -65.0 % | -33.5 % |
| John Wiley and Sons Inc | Q2 2026 | -7.7 % | -6.7 % |
| Scholastic Corporation | Q3 2026 | -4.4 % | +41.0 % |
| Steel Connect Inc | Q3 2024 | +13.8 % | +5.3 % |
| Pcs Edventures Inc | Q2 2026 | -27.0 % | -67.9 % |
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co's Returns and Turnover vs Peers
ROA, ROI and ROE (trailing 12 months), receivables and inventory turnover| Company | ROA | ROI | ROE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co | 10.93% | 15.14% | 83.73% |
| John Wiley and Sons Inc | 7.28% | 9.85% | 25.27% |
| Scholastic Corporation | 3.15% | 4.66% | 7.02% |
| Steel Connect Inc | 18.47% | 21.97% | 64.03% |
| Pcs Edventures 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).
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co's Valuation vs Peers
P/E, price to sales, PEG, price to cash flow and price to book| Company | P/E | Price / Sales |
|---|---|---|
| Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Co | 12.98 | 2.63 |
| John Wiley and Sons Inc | 12.87 | 1.45 |
| Scholastic Corporation | 26.24 | 0.42 |
| Steel Connect Inc | 4.06 | 1.76 |
| Pcs Edventures Inc | - | 2.39 |
| PEERS AVERAGE | 11.17 | 1.38 |
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.