ITT vs Xylem
ITT and XYL 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 ITT and XYL compare
Xylem is the larger company, worth 1.2 times as much as ITT ($21.6B against $17.7B).
On earnings, Xylem is cheaper: it trades at 22.0× trailing earnings, against 38.9× for ITT.
ITT grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (28.1% versus 4.5% for Xylem).
Xylem keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 11.2% compared with 8.9% at ITT.
Both pay dividends: ITT yields 0.76% and Xylem 1.8%.
Xylem scores higher on the StockData Score (23 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 | ITT | XYL |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $17.7B | $21.6B |
| Share price | $198.50 | $92.40 |
| Change, 1 year | 1.6% | −39.6% |
| Change, 5 years | 90.8% | −29.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.32 | 0.99 |
| Employees | 12K | 22K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 12 | 23 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 6 (better) |
| Growth score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Performance score | 3 | 3 |
| Health score | 2 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 4 | 4 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 38.9× | 22.0× (better) |
| P/S | 3.7× | 2.4× (better) |
| P/B | 3.7× | 2.1× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 23.2× | 17.6× (better) |
| P/FCF | 34.8× | 22.5× (better) |
| PEG | 3.32 | 0.85 (better) |
| FCF yield | 2.9% | 4.4% (better) |
| Fair value | $127.50 | $129.28 |
| Margin of safety | −55.7% | 28.5% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 28.1% (better) | 4.5% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.7% | 13.1% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −18.6% | 8.5% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −19.9% | 9.1% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 49.1% (better) | 22.9% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 35.2% | 39.2% (better) |
| Operating margin | 14.4% | 14.5% (better) |
| Net margin | 8.9% | 11.2% (better) |
| FCF margin | 10.8% (better) | 10.5% |
| Return on equity | 11.5% (better) | 9.5% |
| Return on invested capital | 8.6% | 8.7% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.78 | 0.28 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.49 | 1.25 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 6.8× | 57.4× (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.26 | 1.61 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.80 | 3.15 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.76% | 1.8% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 29.5% | 39.5% |
| Years of dividend growth | 13 | 13 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 15.7% (better) | 9.0% |
| Buyback yield | 0.70% | 5.8% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 1.5% | 7.6% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 98.7% | 93.2% |
| Held by insiders | 0.60% | 0.19% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$12.8M | −$612K (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 7.6% | 4.5% |
Go deeper
- ITT stock overview
- ITT income statement
- ITT valuation and score
- XYL stock overview
- XYL income statement
- XYL valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.