Nobility Homes
Through the investors’ lenses
Each of these investors has said in public what they look at before buying. Click a name to see how this company measures up — a tick where it passes one of their tests, a cross where it does not.
Warren Buffett 3/3
| Measure | NOBH | Checked against | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Owner earnings | $8.50m | positive | ✓ |
| Return on equity | 13.9% | median 11.7% | ✓ |
| Debt to equity | — | median 0.79x | — |
| Operating margin | 19.1% | median 15.0% | ✓ |
Passes 3 of 3. To be clear: Warren Buffett has never said anything about Nobility Homes. These are the company’s own figures put through the tests he described. What he looks at, and why →
Terry Smith 1/2
| Measure | NOBH | Checked against | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Return on capital employed | — | median 10.1% | — |
| Cash conversion | 0.49x | median 1.78x | ✗ |
| Operating margin | 19.1% | median 15.0% | ✓ |
| Debt to equity | — | median 0.79x | — |
Passes 1 of 2. To be clear: Terry Smith has never said anything about Nobility Homes. These are the company’s own figures put through the tests he described. What he looks at, and why →
Charlie Munger 2/2
| Measure | NOBH | Checked against | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Return on capital employed | — | median 10.1% | — |
| Return on equity | 13.9% | median 11.7% | ✓ |
| Operating margin | 19.1% | median 15.0% | ✓ |
Passes 2 of 2. To be clear: Charlie Munger has never said anything about Nobility Homes. These are the company’s own figures put through the tests he described. What he looks at, and why →
Chuck Akre 1/3
| Measure | NOBH | Checked against | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Return on equity | 13.9% | median 11.7% | ✓ |
| Debt to equity | — | median 0.79x | — |
| Cash conversion | 0.49x | median 1.78x | ✗ |
| Return on equity, sustained | 7 of 10 | 8 of 10 above median | ✗ |
Passes 1 of 3. To be clear: Chuck Akre has never said anything about Nobility Homes. These are the company’s own figures put through the tests he described. What he looks at, and why →
Philip Fisher 3/3
| Measure | NOBH | Checked against | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Operating margin | 19.1% | median 15.0% | ✓ |
| Net margin | 16.0% | median 10.2% | ✓ |
| Return on capital employed | — | median 10.1% | — |
| Operating margin, held or improving | 19.1% | 10-yr median 16.4% | ✓ |
Passes 3 of 3. To be clear: Philip Fisher has never said anything about Nobility Homes. These are the company’s own figures put through the tests he described. What he looks at, and why →
Walter Schloss 1/1
| Measure | NOBH | Checked against | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Current ratio | 8.33x | median 1.25x | ✓ |
| Debt to equity | — | median 0.79x | — |
Passes 1 of 1. To be clear: Walter Schloss has never said anything about Nobility Homes. These are the company’s own figures put through the tests he described. What he looks at, and why →
Benjamin Graham 2/2
| Measure | NOBH | Checked against | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Current ratio | 8.33x | 2.00x published | ✓ |
| Long-term debt to working capital | — | 1.00x published | — |
| Positive earnings, ten years running | 10 yrs | 10 published | ✓ |
Passes 2 of 2. To be clear: Benjamin Graham has never said anything about Nobility Homes. These are the company’s own figures put through the tests he described. What he looks at, and why →
Peter Lynch 1/1
| Measure | NOBH | Checked against | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Debt to equity | — | median 0.79x | — |
| Net margin | 16.0% | median 10.2% | ✓ |
Passes 1 of 1. To be clear: Peter Lynch has never said anything about Nobility Homes. These are the company’s own figures put through the tests he described. What he looks at, and why →
| Basis | Payout | Why |
|---|---|---|
| GAAP earnings | 48.4% | whyA single year's earnings for a commodity producer can be several times the through-cycle average. This ratio computed in a trough looks alarming and in a peak looks trivial; neither describes whether the dividend is affordable across a cycle. |
| Operating cash flow | 98.2% | whyAbsorbs working-capital swings that earnings do not. |
| Free cash flow | 102.6% | whyNets out the capital spending producers cut in downturns — so it flatters a trough year. |
Spread between highest and lowest: 54.2 percentage points. Same filings, different denominators.
Coverage rating 11 / 100 — Not covered. ? Peer standing 7/50Direction 0/30Stability 4/20
Against its own history: 102.6% this year vs 55.1% median over the prior 5. A gap this size is usually a one-off — acquisition, settlement, cyclical trough — not a dividend that stopped being funded. The rating reads the latest year; the table shows the trend.
Free cash flow payout, last 6 years
| Fiscal year | Payout |
|---|---|
| 2025-11-01 | 102.6% |
| 2024-11-02 | 71.4% |
| 2023-11-04 | 35.1% |
| 2021-11-06 | 31.7% |
| 2020-10-31 | 55.1% |
| 2019-11-02 | 91.7% |
Coverage has deteriorated three years running — 31.7% to 102.6% — and the dividend now exceeds what the basis that applies can fund.
14% of the 36 materials here pay out more — at the demanding end.
The arithmetic
- GAAP earnings — dividends declared per share $1.25 ÷ diluted EPS $2.58
- Operating cash flow — dividends paid $4.09m ÷ operating cash flow $4.16m
- Free cash flow — dividends paid $4.09m ÷ (operating cash flow $4.16m − capex $180k)
Where the figures came from
- 10-K filed 2026-01-30 · accession 0001193125-26-031573
All public at sec.gov — you should not have to take our word for it.
Computed straight from SEC XBRL. A number that looks wrong to you is more useful to us than agreement — tell us.
What the free cash flow payout ratio measures, and where every company here sits on it.
Also on: covered on earnings, not on the basis that applies · rated not covered · when it files.
When this changes
Every figure above is recomputed whenever Nobility Homes files. The monthly letter carries what filed, what moved, and one finding computed across every company here.