Allison Transmission vs Garrett Motion
ALSN and GTX side by side, both in motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How ALSN and GTX compare
Allison Transmission is the larger company, worth 2.3 times as much as Garrett Motion ($8.9B against $3.9B).
On earnings, Garrett Motion is cheaper: it trades at 10.7× trailing earnings, against 17.2× for Allison Transmission.
Allison Transmission grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (37.6% versus 6.9% for Garrett Motion).
Allison Transmission keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 12.0% compared with 10.0% at Garrett Motion.
Both pay dividends: Allison Transmission yields 1.1% and Garrett Motion 1.5%.
Allison Transmission scores higher on the StockData Score (15 against 14 for Garrett Motion), 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 | ALSN | GTX |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $8.9B | $3.9B |
| Share price | $108.05 | $20.91 |
| Change, 1 year | 32.4% | 22.4% |
| Change, 5 years | 206% | 199% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.74 | 0.84 |
| Employees | 4,000 | 2,000 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 15 (better) | 14 |
| Valuation score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 17.2× | 10.7× (better) |
| P/S | 2.0× | 1.0× (better) |
| P/B | 4.5× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 14.7× | – |
| P/FCF | 12.1× | 9.9× (better) |
| PEG | 1.75 | 0.40 (better) |
| FCF yield | 8.3% | 10.1% (better) |
| Fair value | $72.46 | $24.84 |
| Margin of safety | −49.1% | 15.8% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 37.6% (better) | 6.9% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 7.7% (better) | 3.4% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −30.6% | 15.6% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −28.6% | 24.2% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 22.8% (better) | 7.7% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 36.4% (better) | 21.1% |
| Operating margin | 19.6% | – |
| Net margin | 12.0% (better) | 10.0% |
| FCF margin | 16.7% (better) | 10.4% |
| Return on equity | 28.3% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 14.6% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 2.08 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 4.31 | – |
| Current ratio | 1.81 (better) | 1.04 |
| Altman Z-score | 1.79 (better) | 1.63 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 9 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.1% | 1.5% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 17.8% | 16.4% |
| Years of dividend growth | 3 | – |
| Buyback yield | 1.6% | 6.3% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 2.6% | 7.8% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 104% | 97.8% |
| Held by insiders | 0.76% | 34.9% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$6.0M (better) | −$166M |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 | 2 |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.8% | 6.4% |
Go deeper
- ALSN stock overview
- ALSN income statement
- ALSN valuation and score
- GTX stock overview
- GTX income statement
- GTX valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.