Advanced Energy Industries vs Littelfuse
AEIS and LFUS side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How AEIS and LFUS compare
Advanced Energy Industries and Littelfuse are about the same size, with market caps of $9.3B and $10.1B.
Advanced Energy Industries grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (31.7% versus 18.7% for Littelfuse).
Both pay dividends: Advanced Energy Industries yields 0.17% and Littelfuse 0.77%.
Littelfuse scores higher on the StockData Score (13 against 10 for Advanced Energy Industries), 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 | AEIS | LFUS |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $9.3B | $10.1B |
| Share price | $231.60 | $397.70 |
| Change, 1 year | 5.6% | 61.4% |
| Change, 5 years | 159% | 23.7% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.48 | 1.31 |
| Employees | 13K | 17K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 10 | 13 (better) |
| Valuation score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Health score | 3 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 406× |
| P/S | 4.1× | 3.7× (better) |
| P/B | 5.8× | 3.7× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 21.3× (better) | 65.4× |
| P/FCF | 133× | 19.1× (better) |
| FCF yield | 0.75% | 5.2% (better) |
| Fair value | $214.79 | $143.58 |
| Margin of safety | −7.8% (better) | −177% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 31.7% (better) | 18.7% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.9% | 10.5% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | −68.1% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | −79.4% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 1.9% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 40.3% (better) | 40.1% |
| Operating margin | 16.0% (better) | 5.5% |
| Net margin | – | 1.4% |
| FCF margin | 3.1% | 19.2% (better) |
| Return on equity | – | 1.4% |
| Return on invested capital | 23.9% (better) | 2.9% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.80 | 0.23 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.37 | −1.29 |
| Interest coverage | 25.0× (better) | 5.7× |
| Current ratio | 3.62 (better) | 2.67 |
| Altman Z-score | 4.81 | 5.76 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | – | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.17% | 0.77% (better) |
| Payout ratio | – | 203% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 7 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 8.6% |
| Buyback yield | 0.08% (better) | 0.00% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.25% | 0.77% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 101% | 99.7% |
| Held by insiders | 1.1% | 1.3% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$32.4M (better) | −$36.1M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 2 |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.8% | 5.4% |
Go deeper
- AEIS stock overview
- AEIS income statement
- AEIS valuation and score
- LFUS stock overview
- LFUS income statement
- LFUS valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.