Coherent vs KLA
COHR and KLAC side by side, both in laboratory apparatus and analytical, optical, measuring, and controlling instruments. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How COHR and KLAC compare
KLA is the larger company, worth 5.0 times as much as Coherent ($206B against $41.2B).
On earnings, KLA is cheaper: it trades at 39.5× trailing earnings, against 51.0× for Coherent.
Coherent grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (22.5% versus 15.8% for KLA).
KLA keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 36.2% compared with 11.3% at Coherent.
KLA pays a dividend yielding 0.53%; Coherent does not pay one.
KLA scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 13 for Coherent), 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 | COHR | KLAC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $41.2B | $206B |
| Share price | $210.32 | $157.91 |
| Change, 1 year | 52.3% | 27.8% |
| Change, 5 years | 227% | 279% |
| Beta (5Y) | 2.30 | 1.74 |
| Employees | 51K | 17K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 13 | 16 (better) |
| Valuation score | 1 | 1 |
| Growth score | 4 | 4 |
| Performance score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 51.0× | 39.5× (better) |
| P/S | 5.8× (better) | 14.2× |
| P/B | 3.8× (better) | 31.6× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 30.1× |
| P/FCF | – | 51.1× |
| PEG | – | 2.66 |
| FCF yield | −2.5% | 2.0% (better) |
| Fair value | $177.79 | $130.03 |
| Margin of safety | −18.3% (better) | −21.4% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 22.5% (better) | 15.8% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 18.0% (better) | 14.4% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 1531% (better) | 24.1% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 25.3% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 11.7% | 22.3% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 37.5% | 61.5% (better) |
| Net margin | 11.3% | 36.2% (better) |
| FCF margin | −14.4% | 27.8% (better) |
| Return on equity | 9.7% | 91.4% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.30 | – |
| Current ratio | 2.43 | 2.76 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 4.26 | 12.03 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 | 8 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 0.53% |
| Payout ratio | – | 21.1% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 10 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 17.3% |
| Buyback yield | −4.9% | 1.3% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | −4.9% | 1.8% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 86.8% | 91.5% |
| Held by insiders | 0.48% | 0.11% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$1.1B | −$112M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 5.7% | 1.9% |
Go deeper
- COHR stock overview
- COHR income statement
- COHR valuation and score
- KLAC stock overview
- KLAC income statement
- KLAC valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.