Hubbell vs Vishay Intertechnology
HUBB and VSH side by side, both in electronic components and accessories. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How HUBB and VSH compare
Hubbell is the larger company, worth 5.4 times as much as Vishay Intertechnology ($22.3B against $4.1B).
On earnings, Hubbell is cheaper: it trades at 25.0× trailing earnings, against 141× for Vishay Intertechnology.
Vishay Intertechnology grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (13.4% versus 10.6% for Hubbell).
Hubbell keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 14.5% compared with 0.86% at Vishay Intertechnology.
Both pay dividends: Hubbell yields 1.3% and Vishay Intertechnology 1.5%.
Hubbell scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 9 for Vishay Intertechnology), 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 | HUBB | VSH |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $22.3B | $4.1B |
| Share price | $422.44 | $26.74 |
| Change, 1 year | −10.6% | 54.7% |
| Change, 5 years | 105% | 30.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.96 | 1.38 |
| Employees | 18K | 23K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 16 (better) | 9 |
| Valuation score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Dividend score | 2 | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 25.0× (better) | 141× |
| P/S | 3.6× | 1.2× (better) |
| P/B | 5.7× | 1.4× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 18.3× | 11.1× (better) |
| P/FCF | 24.8× | – |
| PEG | 1.39 | – |
| FCF yield | 4.0% (better) | −0.17% |
| Fair value | $443.55 | $36.54 |
| Margin of safety | 4.8% | 26.8% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 10.6% | 13.4% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.7% (better) | 4.2% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 8.4% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 9.5% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 20.8% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 35.2% (better) | 20.9% |
| Operating margin | 20.2% (better) | 3.3% |
| Net margin | 14.5% (better) | 0.86% |
| FCF margin | 14.5% (better) | −0.21% |
| Return on equity | 24.4% (better) | 1.1% |
| Return on invested capital | 14.5% (better) | 2.1% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.37 | 0.33 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.33 (better) | −0.96 |
| Interest coverage | – | 2.8× |
| Current ratio | 1.61 | 1.80 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.68 (better) | 2.34 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.3% | 1.5% (better) |
| Years of dividend growth | 16 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 7.7% (better) | 1.0% |
| Buyback yield | 0.91% (better) | −0.00% |
| Shareholder yield | 2.3% (better) | 1.5% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 96.7% | 99.4% |
| Held by insiders | 0.41% | 1.2% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$20.2M | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 4.9% | 10.9% |
Go deeper
- HUBB stock overview
- HUBB income statement
- HUBB valuation and score
- VSH stock overview
- VSH income statement
- VSH valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.