Agilent Technologies vs Roper Technologies
A and ROP side by side, both in laboratory apparatus and analytical, optical, measuring, and controlling instruments. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How A and ROP compare
Agilent Technologies and Roper Technologies are about the same size, with market caps of $49.3B and $46.1B.
On earnings, Roper Technologies is cheaper: it trades at 19.3× trailing earnings, against 34.5× for Agilent Technologies.
Roper Technologies grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (10.9% versus 8.6% for Agilent Technologies).
Roper Technologies keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 30.2% compared with 19.5% at Agilent Technologies.
Both pay dividends: Agilent Technologies yields 0.58% and Roper Technologies 0.78%.
Agilent Technologies scores higher on the StockData Score (21 against 19 for Roper Technologies), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | A | ROP |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $49.3B | $46.1B |
| Share price | $174.87 | $466.60 |
| Change, 1 year | 22.1% | 4.6% |
| Change, 5 years | 11.8% | −3.7% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.04 | 0.75 |
| Employees | 18K | 19K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 21 (better) | 19 |
| Valuation score | 1 | 6 (better) |
| Growth score | 4 | 4 |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 34.5× | 19.3× (better) |
| P/S | 6.7× | 5.6× (better) |
| P/B | 6.7× | 2.5× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 25.1× | 24.7× (better) |
| P/FCF | 38.9× | – |
| PEG | 11.43 | – |
| FCF yield | 2.6% | – |
| Fair value | $149.03 | $627.18 |
| Margin of safety | −17.3% | 25.6% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 8.6% | 10.9% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 5.4% | 14.5% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 18.0% | 62.7% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 18.7% | 69.6% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 14.7% (better) | 9.6% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 53.8% | 69.5% (better) |
| Operating margin | 22.2% | 28.0% (better) |
| Net margin | 19.5% | 30.2% (better) |
| FCF margin | 17.2% | – |
| Return on equity | 21.0% (better) | 13.1% |
| Return on invested capital | 26.4% (better) | 6.7% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.04 (better) | 0.61 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.76 | 4.73 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 15.5× (better) | 5.9× |
| Current ratio | 2.05 (better) | 0.55 |
| Altman Z-score | 5.79 (better) | 2.83 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.58% | 0.78% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 19.9% | 14.7% |
| Years of dividend growth | 10 | 14 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 6.6% | 10.1% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 0.77% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 1.4% (better) | 0.78% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 92.8% | 103% |
| Held by insiders | 0.29% | 0.37% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$3.2M (better) | −$13.5M |
| Superinvestors holding | 3 | 3 |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.9% | 4.6% |
Go deeper
- A stock overview
- A income statement
- A valuation and score
- ROP stock overview
- ROP income statement
- ROP valuation and score
Other comparisons
- A vs AVTR
- A vs ILMN
- A vs KLAC
- A vs MTD
- A vs TMO
- A vs WAT
- AME vs ROP
- DHR vs ROP
- FTV vs ROP
- KEYS vs ROP
- ROK vs ROP
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.