Crane NXT vs Viavi Solutions
CXT and VIAV side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CXT and VIAV compare
Viavi Solutions is the larger company, worth 2.4 times as much as Crane NXT ($8.1B against $3.3B).
On earnings, Crane NXT is cheaper: it trades at 26.2× trailing earnings, against 132× for Viavi Solutions.
Viavi Solutions grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (47.4% versus 17.5% for Crane NXT).
Crane NXT keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 6.9% compared with 4.0% at Viavi Solutions.
Crane NXT pays a dividend yielding 1.2%; Viavi Solutions does not pay one.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | CXT | VIAV |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $3.3B | $8.1B |
| Share price | $57.97 | $33.00 |
| Change, 1 year | −7.4% | 81.7% |
| Change, 5 years | −44.1% | 112% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.97 | 1.18 |
| Employees | 2,200 | 4,100 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 11 | 11 |
| Valuation score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 4 | 4 |
| Dividend score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 26.2× (better) | 132× |
| P/S | 1.8× (better) | 4.8× |
| P/B | 2.6× (better) | 6.1× |
| EV/EBITDA | 8.9× (better) | 43.9× |
| P/FCF | – | 53.2× |
| FCF yield | – | 1.9% |
| Fair value | $55.63 | $16.34 |
| Margin of safety | −4.2% (better) | −102% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 17.5% | 47.4% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | −10.8% | 4.8% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −17.1% | 341% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −17.5% | 257% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −4.1% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 41.2% | 58.9% (better) |
| Operating margin | 12.7% (better) | 10.6% |
| Net margin | 6.9% (better) | 4.0% |
| FCF margin | – | 9.1% |
| Return on equity | 10.2% (better) | 6.5% |
| Return on invested capital | 15.1% | 16.2% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.18 (better) | 0.19 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.05 | −1.58 |
| Interest coverage | – | 3.9× |
| Current ratio | 1.31 | 1.65 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.87 (better) | −32.77 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.2% | – |
| Payout ratio | 31.9% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 2 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | −16.9% | – |
| Buyback yield | – | 1.8% |
| Shareholder yield | 1.2% | 1.8% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 107% | 97.5% |
| Held by insiders | 0.23% | 1.2% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $1.2M (better) | −$57.4M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 15.7% | 4.8% |
Go deeper
- CXT stock overview
- CXT income statement
- CXT valuation and score
- VIAV stock overview
- VIAV income statement
- VIAV valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.