Forum Energy Technologies vs TechnipFMC
FET and FTI side by side, both in construction, mining, and materials handling. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How FET and FTI compare
TechnipFMC is the larger company, worth 27 times as much as Forum Energy Technologies ($26.3B against $955M).
On earnings, TechnipFMC is cheaper: it trades at 21.1× trailing earnings, against 33.3× for Forum Energy Technologies.
Forum Energy Technologies grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (10.6% versus 9.1% for TechnipFMC).
TechnipFMC keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 12.0% compared with 3.5% at Forum Energy Technologies.
TechnipFMC pays a dividend yielding 0.30%; Forum Energy Technologies does not pay one.
TechnipFMC scores higher on the StockData Score (18 against 11 for Forum Energy Technologies), 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 | FET | FTI |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $955M | $26.3B |
| Share price | $84.94 | $66.95 |
| Change, 1 year | 164% | 62.7% |
| Change, 5 years | 280% | 804% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.88 | 0.87 |
| Employees | 1,700 | 37K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 11 | 18 (better) |
| Valuation score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 4 | 4 |
| Health score | 3 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 33.3× | 21.1× (better) |
| P/S | 1.1× (better) | 2.5× |
| P/B | 3.0× (better) | 7.9× |
| EV/EBITDA | 16.3× | 11.6× (better) |
| P/FCF | 15.4× (better) | 16.5× |
| FCF yield | 6.5% (better) | 6.1% |
| Fair value | $67.36 | $79.49 |
| Margin of safety | −26.1% | 15.8% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 10.6% (better) | 9.1% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.1% (better) | 8.7% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 35.8% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 42.0% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 30.6% | – |
| Operating margin | 7.4% | 16.8% (better) |
| Net margin | 3.5% | 12.0% (better) |
| FCF margin | 7.1% | 14.9% (better) |
| Return on equity | 9.8% | 38.6% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 10.1% | 50.6% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.40 | 0.12 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.44 (better) | −0.29 |
| Interest coverage | – | 30.9× |
| Current ratio | 2.04 (better) | 1.09 |
| Altman Z-score | 1.48 | 3.39 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 8 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 0.30% |
| Payout ratio | – | 6.2% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 9.0% |
| Buyback yield | 2.4% | 4.5% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 2.4% | 4.8% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 87.3% | 98.5% |
| Held by insiders | 10.4% | 1.2% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$3.0M (better) | −$77.1M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 6.0% | 3.5% |
Go deeper
- FET stock overview
- FET income statement
- FET valuation and score
- FTI stock overview
- FTI income statement
- FTI valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.