Gates Industrial vs Timken
GTES and TKR 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 TKR compare
Timken is the larger company, worth 1.3 times as much as Gates Industrial ($7.7B against $6.0B).
On earnings, Gates Industrial is cheaper: it trades at 16.5× trailing earnings, against 30.1× for Timken.
Timken grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (5.5% versus 4.0% for Gates Industrial).
Gates Industrial keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 10.4% compared with 5.4% at Timken.
Timken pays a dividend yielding 1.3%; Gates Industrial does not pay one.
Gates Industrial scores higher on the StockData Score (13 against 12 for Timken), 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 | TKR |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $6.0B | $7.7B |
| Share price | $23.83 | $110.90 |
| Change, 1 year | 5.9% | 39.9% |
| Change, 5 years | 31.2% | 52.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.19 | 0.99 |
| Employees | 13K | 19K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 13 (better) | 12 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 1 |
| Health score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 16.5× (better) | 30.1× |
| P/S | 1.7× | 1.6× (better) |
| P/B | 1.7× (better) | 2.4× |
| EV/EBITDA | 11.1× (better) | 12.9× |
| P/FCF | 16.4× (better) | 19.9× |
| PEG | 2.17 | – |
| FCF yield | 6.1% (better) | 5.0% |
| Fair value | $30.78 | $96.69 |
| Margin of safety | 22.6% (better) | −14.7% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 4.0% | 5.5% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.3% | 5.5% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 55.6% (better) | −16.5% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 58.2% (better) | −16.1% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 28.9% (better) | 2.0% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 40.3% (better) | 30.8% |
| Operating margin | 13.5% (better) | 10.5% |
| Net margin | 10.4% (better) | 5.4% |
| FCF margin | 10.3% (better) | 8.1% |
| Return on equity | 10.6% (better) | 8.2% |
| Return on invested capital | 9.8% (better) | 7.6% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.62 (better) | 0.65 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.97 (better) | 2.27 |
| Interest coverage | 3.9× | 4.8× (better) |
| Current ratio | 3.41 (better) | 3.10 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.39 | 3.18 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 1.3% |
| Payout ratio | – | 38.3% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 12 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 4.2% |
| Buyback yield | 3.3% (better) | 0.78% |
| Shareholder yield | 3.3% (better) | 2.1% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 101% | 94.6% |
| Held by insiders | 2.0% | 2.9% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$2.0M (better) | −$18.1M |
| Short interest, % of float | 4.9% | 7.3% |
Go deeper
- GTES stock overview
- GTES income statement
- GTES valuation and score
- TKR stock overview
- TKR income statement
- TKR valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.