ESCO Technologies vs Viavi Solutions
ESE and VIAV side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How ESE and VIAV compare
Viavi Solutions is the larger company, worth 1.2 times as much as ESCO Technologies ($7.4B against $6.2B).
Viavi Solutions grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (40.0% versus 27.0% for ESCO Technologies).
ESCO Technologies keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 24.4% compared with −2.0% at Viavi Solutions.
ESCO Technologies pays a dividend yielding 0.13%; Viavi Solutions does not pay one.
ESCO Technologies scores higher on the StockData Score (21 against 7 for Viavi Solutions), 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 | ESE | VIAV |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $6.2B | $7.4B |
| Share price | $237.70 | $29.92 |
| Change, 1 year | 7.4% | 114% |
| Change, 5 years | 163% | 89.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.87 | 1.16 |
| Employees | 3,425 | 4,100 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 21 (better) | 7 |
| Valuation score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 19.6× | – |
| P/S | 4.8× (better) | 4.9× |
| P/B | 3.8× (better) | 5.1× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 66.4× |
| P/FCF | 29.7× (better) | 89.2× |
| PEG | 0.36 | – |
| FCF yield | 3.4% (better) | 1.1% |
| Fair value | $334.25 | $15.30 |
| Margin of safety | 28.9% (better) | −95.6% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 27.0% | 40.0% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 8.4% (better) | 4.8% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 174% (better) | −187% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 173% (better) | −187% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 24.8% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 42.0% | 57.7% (better) |
| Operating margin | – | 6.9% |
| Net margin | 24.4% (better) | −2.0% |
| FCF margin | 16.1% (better) | 5.5% |
| Return on equity | 21.4% (better) | −2.7% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 6.4% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.05 (better) | 0.17 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | −3.85 |
| Interest coverage | – | 2.2× |
| Current ratio | 1.38 | 1.85 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 6.09 (better) | −31.59 |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.13% | – |
| Payout ratio | 2.6% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 0.00% | – |
| Buyback yield | – | 0.41% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.13% | 0.41% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 100% | 97.5% |
| Held by insiders | 20.2% | 1.3% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$8.1M (better) | −$61.8M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.0% | 5.4% |
Go deeper
- ESE stock overview
- ESE income statement
- ESE 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.