Baker Hughes vs Eaton
BKR and ETN side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How BKR and ETN compare
Eaton is the larger company, worth 2.6 times as much as Baker Hughes ($144B against $54.8B).
Eaton grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (15.5% versus 0.42% for Baker Hughes).
Eaton keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 12.8% compared with 11.2% at Baker Hughes.
Both pay dividends: Baker Hughes yields 1.7% and Eaton 1.2%.
Eaton scores higher on the StockData Score (14 against 8 for Baker Hughes), 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 | BKR | ETN |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $54.8B | $144B |
| Share price | $55.23 | $369.97 |
| Change, 1 year | 14.3% | −4.6% |
| Change, 5 years | 123% | 116% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.65 | 1.08 |
| Employees | 56K | 97K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 8 | 14 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 37.7× |
| P/S | 2.0× (better) | 4.8× |
| P/B | 2.8× (better) | 7.1× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 25.4× |
| P/FCF | 17.5× (better) | 36.5× |
| PEG | – | 1.94 |
| FCF yield | 5.7% (better) | 2.7% |
| Fair value | $27.85 | $233.60 |
| Margin of safety | −98.3% | −58.4% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 0.42% | 15.5% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 6.0% | 9.0% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 1.6% (better) | −2.5% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | −1.2% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 24.5% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | – | 35.9% |
| Net margin | 11.2% | 12.8% (better) |
| FCF margin | 11.3% | 13.1% (better) |
| Return on equity | 16.5% | 19.7% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.82 (better) | 1.02 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 3.09 |
| Current ratio | 2.09 (better) | 1.24 |
| Altman Z-score | 1.86 | 3.29 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.7% (better) | 1.2% |
| Payout ratio | 29.4% | 43.5% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 15 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 7.3% |
| Buyback yield | 0.00% | 0.39% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 1.7% (better) | 1.6% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 97.2% | 85.3% |
| Held by insiders | 0.13% | 0.19% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$73.2M | −$22.0M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.4% | 2.1% |
Go deeper
- BKR stock overview
- BKR income statement
- BKR valuation and score
- ETN stock overview
- ETN income statement
- ETN valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.