Curtiss Wright vs Nordson
CW and NDSN side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CW and NDSN compare
Curtiss Wright and Nordson are about the same size, with market caps of $17.6B and $18.0B.
On earnings, Nordson is cheaper: it trades at 32.6× trailing earnings, against 32.8× for Curtiss Wright.
Curtiss Wright grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (10.5% versus 7.0% for Nordson).
Nordson keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 18.6% compared with 14.8% at Curtiss Wright.
Both pay dividends: Curtiss Wright yields 0.21% and Nordson 1.1%.
Curtiss Wright scores higher on the StockData Score (19 against 18 for Nordson), 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 | CW | NDSN |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $17.6B | $18.0B |
| Share price | $476.01 | $322.67 |
| Change, 1 year | −20.9% | 38.4% |
| Change, 5 years | 250% | 23.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.84 | 1.01 |
| Employees | 9,100 | 8,000 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 19 (better) | 18 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Performance score | 6 | 6 |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Dividend score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 32.8× | 32.6× (better) |
| P/S | 4.8× (better) | 6.0× |
| P/B | 6.3× | 5.5× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 22.4× | 22.3× (better) |
| P/FCF | 28.1× | 24.8× (better) |
| PEG | 1.72 | – |
| FCF yield | 3.6% | 4.0% (better) |
| Fair value | $335.41 | $247.33 |
| Margin of safety | −41.9% | −30.5% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 10.5% (better) | 7.0% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 7.9% (better) | 5.6% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 19.9% | 22.0% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 22.6% | 24.2% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 21.8% (better) | 14.8% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 37.7% | 55.3% (better) |
| Operating margin | 18.8% | 26.9% (better) |
| Net margin | 14.8% | 18.6% (better) |
| FCF margin | 17.1% | 24.3% (better) |
| Return on equity | 19.7% (better) | 17.8% |
| Return on invested capital | 16.3% (better) | 13.4% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.35 (better) | 0.53 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.60 (better) | 1.84 |
| Interest coverage | 16.2× (better) | 8.8× |
| Current ratio | 1.60 | 1.82 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 6.37 (better) | 6.24 |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.21% | 1.1% (better) |
| Payout ratio | – | 33.0% |
| Years of dividend growth | 9 | 16 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 6.5% | 15.6% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 2.6% (better) | 1.1% |
| Shareholder yield | 2.8% (better) | 2.1% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 85.8% | 76.5% |
| Held by insiders | 0.39% | 0.55% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$30.0M | −$25.6M (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.1% | 2.6% |
Go deeper
- CW stock overview
- CW income statement
- CW valuation and score
- NDSN stock overview
- NDSN income statement
- NDSN valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.