Fortive vs Keysight Technologies
FTV and KEYS side by side, both in laboratory apparatus and analytical, optical, measuring, and controlling instruments. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How FTV and KEYS compare
Keysight Technologies is the larger company, worth 2.6 times as much as Fortive ($52.3B against $19.9B).
On earnings, Fortive is cheaper: it trades at 39.0× trailing earnings, against 42.1× for Keysight Technologies.
Keysight Technologies grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (25.5% versus 5.6% for Fortive).
Keysight Technologies keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 19.1% compared with 12.4% at Fortive.
Fortive pays a dividend yielding 0.38%; Keysight Technologies does not pay one.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | FTV | KEYS |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $19.9B | $52.3B |
| Share price | $65.84 | $307.20 |
| Change, 1 year | 33.9% | 80.2% |
| Change, 5 years | −16.4% | 67.2% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.97 | 1.38 |
| Employees | 10K | 17K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 14 | 14 |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Performance score | 2 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 39.0× (better) | 42.1× |
| P/S | 4.6× (better) | 7.9× |
| P/B | 3.3× (better) | 8.0× |
| EV/EBITDA | 18.7× (better) | 39.2× |
| P/FCF | 21.2× (better) | 35.6× |
| FCF yield | 4.7% (better) | 2.8% |
| Fair value | $69.80 | $245.85 |
| Margin of safety | 5.7% (better) | −25.0% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 5.6% | 25.5% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | −2.1% | 5.0% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −30.5% | 132% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −23.9% | 132% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −17.4% | 8.2% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 63.2% | 64.7% (better) |
| Operating margin | 18.2% | 20.3% (better) |
| Net margin | 12.4% | 19.1% (better) |
| FCF margin | 21.7% | 22.3% (better) |
| Return on equity | 6.5% | 20.6% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 6.3% | 21.3% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.58 | 0.38 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.54 (better) | −0.07 |
| Interest coverage | – | 12.3× |
| Current ratio | 1.24 | 2.02 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 3.46 | 8.01 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.38% | – |
| Payout ratio | 10.6% | – |
| Buyback yield | 9.9% (better) | 1.2% |
| Shareholder yield | 10.3% (better) | 1.2% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 109% | 90.6% |
| Held by insiders | 0.58% | 0.72% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$6.8M (better) | −$32.5M |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 | 2 |
| Short interest, % of float | 5.7% | 1.4% |
Go deeper
- FTV stock overview
- FTV income statement
- FTV valuation and score
- KEYS stock overview
- KEYS income statement
- KEYS valuation and score
Other comparisons
- AME vs KEYS
- COHR vs KEYS
- DHR vs FTV
- FTV vs MKSI
- FTV vs RAL
- FTV vs ROP
- KEYS vs KLAC
- KEYS vs MKSI
- KEYS vs RAL
- KEYS vs ROP
- KEYS vs ST
- KEYS vs TER
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.