Profit and prosper with the best of Kiplinger's advice on investing, taxes, retirement, personal finance and much more. Delivered daily. Enter your email in the box and click Sign Me Up.
You are now subscribed
Your newsletter sign-up was successful
Want to add more newsletters?
Delivered daily
Kiplinger Today
Profit and prosper with the best of Kiplinger's advice on investing, taxes, retirement, personal finance and much more delivered daily. Smart money moves start here.
Sent five days a week
Kiplinger A Step Ahead
Get practical help to make better financial decisions in your everyday life, from spending to savings on top deals.
Delivered daily
Kiplinger Closing Bell
Get today's biggest financial and investing headlines delivered to your inbox every day the U.S. stock market is open.
Sent twice a week
Kiplinger Adviser Intel
Financial pros across the country share best practices and fresh tactics to preserve and grow your wealth.
Delivered weekly
Kiplinger Tax Tips
Trim your federal and state tax bills with practical tax-planning and tax-cutting strategies.
Sent twice a week
Kiplinger Retirement Tips
Your twice-a-week guide to planning and enjoying a financially secure and richly rewarding retirement
Sent bimonthly.
Kiplinger Adviser Angle
Insights for advisers, wealth managers and other financial professionals.
Sent twice a week
Kiplinger Investing Weekly
Your twice-a-week roundup of promising stocks, funds, companies and industries you should consider, ones you should avoid, and why.
Sent weekly for six weeks
Kiplinger Invest for Retirement
Your step-by-step six-part series on how to invest for retirement, from devising a successful strategy to exactly which investments to choose.
Shares of Smith & Wesson closed at $5.82 on September 2, just about where they traded three years ago. Between then and last October, the firearms maker became a growth-stock darling, beating profit estimates and zooming to as high as $22 before stalling badly. Investors dropped the stock (symbol SWHC) like a hot shell casing.
Will it rebound? There's a good chance it will. But to appreciate S&W's prospects, you have to understand a little about its history, about politics and about what the U.S. gun culture expects from the country's largest handgun producer.
S&W's timing usually has been good. The company was created five years before the Civil War began and made weapons with what was then a big technological breakthrough: cartridges in a revolving cylinder. Since the company's inception, its products have often been the signature sidearm of both law enforcement and military personnel. To the general public, S&W is best known for its Model 29, a .44-magnum revolver popularized by Clint Eastwood in the Dirty Harry movies.
From just $107.88 $24.99 for Kiplinger Personal Finance
Become a smarter, better informed investor. Subscribe from just $107.88 $24.99, plus get up to 4 Special Issues
Sign up for Kiplinger’s Free Newsletters
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice on investing, taxes, retirement, personal finance and more - straight to your e-mail.
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice - straight to your e-mail.
The Wesson family gave up control of the company in the 1960s, and for 40 years it was a bauble passed among conglomerates. The most recent one to own it, England's Tomkins PLC, did something in 2000 that so offended U.S. gun retailers and buyers that sales plummeted: To settle government lawsuits, Tomkins signed an agreement with the Clinton administration that, among other things, limited the sale of handguns.
But truth be told, U.S. gun enthusiasts weren't wild about Smith & Wesson products at the time of the scrum. Tomkins had let the brand languish, and its products lacked the innovation and quality of such foreign competitors as Austria's Glock. Glock handguns now dominate the military and law-enforcement market.
By 2001, Tomkins was sick of its money-losing Smith & Wesson division and sold it to a U.S. company for $45 million -- well below the $112 million Tomkins had paid for S&W 14 years earlier. The buyer was Saf-T-Hammer, which made gun locks, among other safety equipment, and which employed a former Smith & Wesson exec as its president. A year later, Saf-T-Hammer changed its name to Smith & Wesson Holdings.
The new company applied itself to improving the quality of its products and increasing the number of models, moves that resonated with gun buyers. A friend of mine who owns several handguns and follows the gun market says that when S&W faltered, U.S. gun owners "were willing to let Smith & Wesson die. They didn't want to buy junk." But if S&W's products are seen as being equal to, if not better than, those of foreign gun makers, most Americans would rather buy guns made by a U.S. company, my friend says.
That's important, because 80% of S&W's handgun sales are to civilians. Unfortunately, civilian demand "fell off a cliff," in fall 2007, says Northland Securities analyst Chris Krueger. He says inventory levels soared, which continued to depress S&W sales, even when demand starting picking up earlier this year. By spring, handgun sales "had pretty much normalized," and sales in July were up 18% from the same month in '07, he says.
Sales may surge this fall, Krueger adds, but that won't necessarily be bullish for S&W. He reckons that gun users may rush to the store in anticipation of a Democratic election sweep, which could lead to enactment of tougher gun-control laws. Still, he's bullish on S&W's stock because of increased demand not just from civilians, but from law-enforcement agencies and the military. S&W is also getting into long guns, although it's still too early to know if its shotguns and rifles will catch on.
The company earned 22 cents a share for its fiscal year that ended last 2008, and Krueger predicts 27 cents a share for fiscal 2009 and 47 cents for fiscal 2010. If he's right, the stock, Democrats willing, could pass the $10 mark and regain its growth-darling status.
Profit and prosper with the best of Kiplinger's advice on investing, taxes, retirement, personal finance and much more. Delivered daily. Enter your email in the box and click Sign Me Up.

-
Dow Leads in Mixed Session on Amgen Earnings: Stock Market TodayThe rest of Wall Street struggled as Advanced Micro Devices earnings caused a chip-stock sell-off.
-
How to Watch the 2026 Winter Olympics Without OverpayingHere’s how to stream the 2026 Winter Olympics live, including low-cost viewing options, Peacock access and ways to catch your favorite athletes and events from anywhere.
-
Here’s How to Stream the Super Bowl for LessWe'll show you the least expensive ways to stream football's biggest event.
-
If You'd Put $1,000 Into AMD Stock 20 Years Ago, Here's What You'd Have TodayAdvanced Micro Devices stock is soaring thanks to AI, but as a buy-and-hold bet, it's been a market laggard.
-
If You'd Put $1,000 Into UPS Stock 20 Years Ago, Here's What You'd Have TodayUnited Parcel Service stock has been a massive long-term laggard.
-
How the Stock Market Performed in the First Year of Trump's Second TermSix months after President Donald Trump's inauguration, take a look at how the stock market has performed.
-
If You'd Put $1,000 Into Lowe's Stock 20 Years Ago, Here's What You'd Have TodayLowe's stock has delivered disappointing returns recently, but it's been a great holding for truly patient investors.
-
If You'd Put $1,000 Into 3M Stock 20 Years Ago, Here's What You'd Have TodayMMM stock has been a pit of despair for truly long-term shareholders.
-
If You'd Put $1,000 Into Coca-Cola Stock 20 Years Ago, Here's What You'd Have TodayEven with its reliable dividend growth and generous stock buybacks, Coca-Cola has underperformed the broad market in the long term.
-
If You Put $1,000 into Qualcomm Stock 20 Years Ago, Here's What You Would Have TodayQualcomm stock has been a big disappointment for truly long-term investors.
-
If You'd Put $1,000 Into Home Depot Stock 20 Years Ago, Here's What You'd Have TodayHome Depot stock has been a buy-and-hold banger for truly long-term investors.