Ingersoll Rand vs ITT
IR and ITT 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 IR and ITT compare
Ingersoll Rand is the larger company, worth 1.8 times as much as ITT ($31.1B against $17.7B).
On earnings, Ingersoll Rand is cheaper: it trades at 22.5× trailing earnings, against 38.9× for ITT.
ITT grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (28.1% versus 8.0% for Ingersoll Rand).
Ingersoll Rand keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 17.2% compared with 8.9% at ITT.
Both pay dividends: Ingersoll Rand yields 0.10% and ITT 0.76%.
Ingersoll Rand scores higher on the StockData Score (18 against 12 for ITT), 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 | IR | ITT |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $31.1B | $17.7B |
| Share price | $80.05 | $198.50 |
| Change, 1 year | 0.44% | 1.6% |
| Change, 5 years | 39.8% | 90.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.14 | 1.32 |
| Employees | 21K | 12K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 18 (better) | 12 |
| Valuation score | 6 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 22.5× (better) | 38.9× |
| P/S | 3.9× | 3.7× (better) |
| P/B | 3.0× (better) | 3.7× |
| EV/EBITDA | 14.4× (better) | 23.2× |
| P/FCF | 20.5× (better) | 34.8× |
| PEG | – | 3.32 |
| FCF yield | 4.9% (better) | 2.9% |
| Fair value | $127.42 | $127.50 |
| Margin of safety | 37.2% (better) | −55.7% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 8.0% | 28.1% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 14.0% (better) | 9.7% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 154% (better) | −18.6% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 163% (better) | −19.9% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 49.1% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 43.1% (better) | 35.2% |
| Operating margin | 22.9% (better) | 14.4% |
| Net margin | 17.2% (better) | 8.9% |
| FCF margin | 18.8% (better) | 10.8% |
| Return on equity | 13.4% (better) | 11.5% |
| Return on invested capital | 11.5% (better) | 8.6% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.45 (better) | 0.78 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.42 (better) | 3.49 |
| Interest coverage | 7.2× (better) | 6.8× |
| Current ratio | 1.69 (better) | 1.26 |
| Altman Z-score | 3.51 (better) | 2.80 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.10% | 0.76% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 2.2% | 29.5% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 13 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 15.7% |
| Buyback yield | 3.2% (better) | 0.70% |
| Shareholder yield | 3.3% (better) | 1.5% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 104% | 98.7% |
| Held by insiders | 0.21% | 0.60% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$58.5M | −$12.8M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.5% | 7.6% |
Go deeper
- IR stock overview
- IR income statement
- IR valuation and score
- ITT stock overview
- ITT income statement
- ITT valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.