Eaton vs Moog
ETN and MOG.A 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 ETN and MOG.A compare
Eaton is the larger company, worth 13 times as much as Moog ($144B against $11.5B).
On earnings, Moog is cheaper: it trades at 30.9× trailing earnings, against 37.7× for Eaton.
Moog grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (15.7% versus 15.5% for Eaton).
Eaton keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 12.8% compared with 8.7% at Moog.
Both pay dividends: Eaton yields 1.2% and Moog 0.33%.
Moog scores higher on the StockData Score (17 against 14 for Eaton), 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 | ETN | MOG.A |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $144B | $11.5B |
| Share price | $369.97 | $362.81 |
| Change, 1 year | −4.6% | 72.3% |
| Change, 5 years | 116% | 334% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.08 | 1.02 |
| Employees | 97K | 13K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 14 | 17 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Performance score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 37.7× | 30.9× (better) |
| P/S | 4.8× | 2.7× (better) |
| P/B | 7.1× | 5.2× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 25.4× | 17.8× (better) |
| P/FCF | 36.5× | 32.8× (better) |
| PEG | 1.94 (better) | 2.07 |
| FCF yield | 2.7% | 3.0% (better) |
| Fair value | $233.60 | $310.23 |
| Margin of safety | −58.4% | −16.9% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 15.5% | 15.7% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.0% (better) | 6.0% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −2.5% | 76.9% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −1.2% | 77.4% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 24.5% | 92.1% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 35.9% (better) | 28.2% |
| Operating margin | – | 13.3% |
| Net margin | 12.8% (better) | 8.7% |
| FCF margin | 13.1% (better) | 8.1% |
| Return on equity | 19.7% (better) | 18.2% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 16.5% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.02 | 0.41 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.09 | 1.22 (better) |
| Interest coverage | – | 8.6× |
| Current ratio | 1.24 | 2.09 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 3.29 | 5.26 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 | 7 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.2% (better) | 0.33% |
| Payout ratio | 43.5% | 9.9% |
| Years of dividend growth | 15 (better) | 5 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 7.3% | 8.9% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 0.39% | 0.68% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 1.6% (better) | 1.0% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 85.3% | 89.3% |
| Held by insiders | 0.19% | 5.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$22.0M | −$5.7M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.1% | – |
Go deeper
- ETN stock overview
- ETN income statement
- ETN valuation and score
- MOG.A stock overview
- MOG.A income statement
- MOG.A valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.