Carlisle Companies vs Entegris
CSL and ENTG side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CSL and ENTG compare
Entegris is the larger company, worth 1.6 times as much as Carlisle Companies ($23.6B against $14.9B).
On earnings, Carlisle Companies is cheaper: it trades at 21.6× trailing earnings, against 60.3× for Entegris.
Entegris grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (9.4% versus 1.9% for Carlisle Companies).
Carlisle Companies keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 14.2% compared with 11.1% at Entegris.
Both pay dividends: Carlisle Companies yields 1.2% and Entegris 0.26%.
Carlisle Companies scores higher on the StockData Score (15 against 14 for Entegris), 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 | CSL | ENTG |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $14.9B | $23.6B |
| Share price | $376.31 | $154.39 |
| Change, 1 year | 13.6% | 63.3% |
| Change, 5 years | 61.3% | 6.2% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.92 | 2.00 |
| Employees | 5,900 | 7,700 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 15 (better) | 14 |
| Valuation score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 2 |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend score | 4 | 4 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 21.6× (better) | 60.3× |
| P/S | 2.9× (better) | 6.7× |
| P/B | 9.2× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 14.1× (better) | 33.2× |
| P/FCF | 17.2× (better) | 38.3× |
| PEG | – | 29.95 |
| FCF yield | 5.8% (better) | 2.6% |
| Fair value | $355.93 | $109.53 |
| Margin of safety | −5.7% (better) | −41.0% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 1.9% | 9.4% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.8% | 11.4% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −10.1% | 36.2% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −2.7% | 35.4% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 24.2% (better) | −6.4% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 35.3% | 47.1% (better) |
| Operating margin | 19.9% (better) | 18.2% |
| Net margin | 14.2% (better) | 11.1% |
| FCF margin | 17.0% | 17.5% (better) |
| Return on equity | 38.8% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 20.2% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.79 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.83 (better) | 3.64 |
| Interest coverage | 9.7× (better) | 3.4× |
| Current ratio | 2.60 | 2.66 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 5.28 (better) | 4.50 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.2% (better) | 0.26% |
| Payout ratio | 25.2% | 15.6% |
| Years of dividend growth | 16 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 15.4% (better) | 4.6% |
| Buyback yield | 7.4% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 8.6% (better) | 0.26% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 104% | 108% |
| Held by insiders | 1.4% | 0.58% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$28.2M (better) | −$51.1M |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 5.1% | 5.8% |
Go deeper
- CSL stock overview
- CSL income statement
- CSL valuation and score
- ENTG stock overview
- ENTG income statement
- ENTG valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.