Advanced Energy Industries vs Vertiv
AEIS and VRT side by side, both in electronic components and accessories. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How AEIS and VRT compare
Vertiv is the larger company, worth 10 times as much as Advanced Energy Industries ($89.5B against $8.9B).
Vertiv grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (26.2% versus 24.6% for Advanced Energy Industries).
Both pay dividends: Advanced Energy Industries yields 0.18% and Vertiv 0.11%.
Vertiv scores higher on the StockData Score (19 against 9 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 | VRT |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $8.9B | $89.5B |
| Share price | $222.06 | $232.50 |
| Change, 1 year | 6.7% | 16.7% |
| Change, 5 years | 133% | 741% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.45 | 2.15 |
| Employees | 13K | 34K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 9 | 19 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Performance score | 1 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 52.6× |
| P/S | 4.4× (better) | 7.8× |
| P/B | 6.1× (better) | 18.8× |
| EV/EBITDA | 26.4× (better) | 35.0× |
| P/FCF | 103× | 30.6× (better) |
| FCF yield | 0.97% | 3.3% (better) |
| Fair value | $172.73 | $196.85 |
| Margin of safety | −28.6% | −18.1% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 24.6% | 26.2% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.9% | 18.5% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 113% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 111% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 1.9% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 39.3% (better) | 38.0% |
| Operating margin | 13.2% | 18.9% (better) |
| Net margin | – | 15.1% |
| FCF margin | 4.3% | 25.5% (better) |
| Return on equity | – | 43.9% |
| Return on invested capital | 19.8% | 38.4% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.87 | 0.62 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.40 | 0.05 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 17.1× | 41.4× (better) |
| Current ratio | 3.79 (better) | 1.38 |
| Altman Z-score | 4.71 | 6.36 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | – | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.18% (better) | 0.11% |
| Payout ratio | – | 5.0% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | – |
| Buyback yield | 0.08% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 0.26% (better) | 0.11% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 101% | 81.9% |
| Held by insiders | 1.1% | 1.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$34.4M (better) | −$128M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 3 |
| Short interest, % of float | 4.6% | 3.8% |
Go deeper
- AEIS stock overview
- AEIS income statement
- AEIS valuation and score
- VRT stock overview
- VRT income statement
- VRT valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.