China Yuchai International vs Eaton
CYD and ETN side by side, both in industrial and commercial machinery and computer equipment. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CYD and ETN compare
China Yuchai International grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (28.9% versus 15.5% for Eaton).
Eaton keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 12.8% compared with 2.2% at China Yuchai International.
Eaton pays a dividend yielding 0.92%; China Yuchai International does not pay one.
Eaton scores higher on the StockData Score (14 against 12 for China Yuchai International), 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 | CYD | ETN |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | – | $140B |
| Share price | $21.83 | $360.62 |
| Change, 1 year | −45.4% | −5.0% |
| Change, 5 years | 80.3% | 109% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.99 | 1.10 |
| Employees | 945 | 97K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 12 | 14 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Performance score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 36.7× |
| P/S | – | 4.7× |
| P/B | – | 6.9× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 24.8× |
| P/FCF | – | 35.6× |
| PEG | – | 1.89 |
| FCF yield | – | 2.8% |
| Fair value | – | $230.50 |
| Margin of safety | – | −56.5% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 28.9% (better) | 15.5% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 3.7% | 9.0% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 66.3% (better) | −2.5% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 74.4% (better) | −1.2% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 1.3% | 24.5% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 16.5% | 35.9% (better) |
| Operating margin | 4.4% | – |
| Net margin | 2.2% | 12.8% (better) |
| FCF margin | 9.1% | 13.1% (better) |
| Return on equity | 5.7% | 19.7% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 15.8% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.21 (better) | 1.02 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −3.06 | 3.09 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 17.7× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.39 (better) | 1.24 |
| Altman Z-score | – | 3.23 |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 7 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 0.92% |
| Payout ratio | – | 43.5% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 15 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 7.3% |
| Buyback yield | – | 0.40% |
| Shareholder yield | – | 1.3% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 22.6% | 85.3% |
| Held by insiders | 20.1% | 0.19% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$1.6M (better) | −$22.1M |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 1.8% |
Go deeper
- CYD stock overview
- CYD income statement
- CYD 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.