Applied Materials vs Amphenol
AMAT and APH 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 AMAT and APH compare
Applied Materials is the larger company, worth 3.2 times as much as Amphenol ($310B against $97.8B).
On earnings, Applied Materials is cheaper: it trades at 33.7× trailing earnings, against 34.6× for Amphenol.
Amphenol grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (57.6% versus 7.8% for Applied Materials).
Applied Materials keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 30.1% compared with 18.0% at Amphenol.
Both pay dividends: Applied Materials yields 0.51% and Amphenol 0.63%.
Amphenol scores higher on the StockData Score (24 against 19 for Applied Materials), 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 | AMAT | APH |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $310B | $97.8B |
| Share price | $390.09 | $79.30 |
| Change, 1 year | 65.5% | 13.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 154% | 289% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.74 | 1.31 |
| Employees | 37K | 170K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 19 | 24 (better) |
| Valuation score | 1 | 5 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 5 (better) |
| Performance score | 6 | 6 |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Dividend score | 4 | 4 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 33.7× (better) | 34.6× |
| P/S | 10.0× | 3.0× (better) |
| P/B | 12.1× | 5.7× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 31.9× | 10.4× (better) |
| P/FCF | 55.1× | 19.1× (better) |
| PEG | 6.48 | 1.16 (better) |
| FCF yield | 1.8% | 5.2% (better) |
| Fair value | $284.71 | $131.09 |
| Margin of safety | −37.0% | 39.5% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 7.8% | 57.6% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 10.5% | 21.8% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 35.6% | 55.2% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 38.3% | 53.0% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 17.2% | 27.8% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 49.4% (better) | 38.8% |
| Operating margin | 29.6% (better) | 27.7% |
| Net margin | 30.1% (better) | 18.0% |
| FCF margin | 18.2% (better) | 15.5% |
| Return on equity | 41.1% (better) | 40.0% |
| Return on invested capital | 36.2% (better) | 27.8% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.30 (better) | 1.04 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.15 | 1.19 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 33.0× (better) | 12.0× |
| Current ratio | 2.42 (better) | 1.94 |
| Altman Z-score | 14.16 (better) | 3.95 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.51% | 0.63% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 16.3% | 18.9% |
| Years of dividend growth | 8 | 14 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 15.4% | 23.4% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 0.66% | 0.82% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 1.2% | 1.5% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 83.7% | – |
| Held by insiders | 0.36% | 0.47% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$180M (better) | −$416M |
| Superinvestors holding | 11 (better) | 2 |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.7% | 2.5% |
Go deeper
- AMAT stock overview
- AMAT income statement
- AMAT valuation and score
- APH stock overview
- APH income statement
- APH valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.