Gates Industrial vs Illinois Tool Works
GTES and ITW side by side, both in general industrial machinery and equipment. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How GTES and ITW compare
Illinois Tool Works is the larger company, worth 13 times as much as Gates Industrial ($79.3B against $6.0B).
Illinois Tool Works grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (4.3% versus 4.0% for Gates Industrial).
Illinois Tool Works pays a dividend yielding 2.4%; Gates Industrial does not pay one.
Gates Industrial scores higher on the StockData Score (13 against 9 for Illinois Tool Works), 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 | GTES | ITW |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $6.0B | $79.3B |
| Share price | $23.83 | $278.55 |
| Change, 1 year | 5.9% | 15.1% |
| Change, 5 years | 31.2% | 19.0% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.19 | 0.83 |
| Employees | 13K | 43K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 13 (better) | 9 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 16.5× | – |
| P/S | 1.7× (better) | 4.8× |
| P/B | 1.7× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 11.1× (better) | 20.2× |
| P/FCF | 16.4× (better) | 27.2× |
| PEG | 2.17 | – |
| FCF yield | 6.1% (better) | 3.7% |
| Fair value | $30.78 | $223.22 |
| Margin of safety | 22.6% (better) | −24.8% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 4.0% | 4.3% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.3% | 5.0% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 55.6% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 58.2% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 28.9% (better) | 9.6% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 40.3% | 53.0% (better) |
| Operating margin | 13.5% | 26.5% (better) |
| Net margin | 10.4% | – |
| FCF margin | 10.3% | 17.7% (better) |
| Return on equity | 10.6% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 9.8% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.62 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.97 (better) | 2.03 |
| Interest coverage | 3.9× | 14.5× (better) |
| Current ratio | 3.41 (better) | 1.11 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.39 | 8.03 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 | – |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 2.4% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 12 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 7.0% |
| Buyback yield | 3.3% (better) | 2.3% |
| Shareholder yield | 3.3% | 4.6% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 101% | 85.5% |
| Held by insiders | 2.0% | 0.29% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$2.0M (better) | −$65.4M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 4.9% | 3.2% |
Go deeper
- GTES stock overview
- GTES income statement
- GTES valuation and score
- ITW stock overview
- ITW income statement
- ITW valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.