Illinois Tool Works vs Zebra Technologies
ITW and ZBRA 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 ITW and ZBRA compare
Illinois Tool Works is the larger company, worth 4.6 times as much as Zebra Technologies ($79.3B against $17.1B).
Zebra Technologies grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (12.7% versus 4.3% for Illinois Tool Works).
Illinois Tool Works pays a dividend yielding 2.4%; Zebra Technologies does not pay one.
Zebra Technologies scores higher on the StockData Score (10 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 | ITW | ZBRA |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $79.3B | $17.1B |
| Share price | $278.55 | $361.26 |
| Change, 1 year | 15.1% | 33.4% |
| Change, 5 years | 19.0% | −40.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.83 | 1.63 |
| Employees | 43K | 11K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 9 | 10 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 33.1× |
| P/S | 4.8× | 2.9× (better) |
| P/B | – | 5.0× |
| EV/EBITDA | 20.2× | 18.4× (better) |
| P/FCF | 27.2× | 18.9× (better) |
| FCF yield | 3.7% | 5.3% (better) |
| Fair value | $223.22 | $344.42 |
| Margin of safety | −24.8% | −4.9% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 4.3% | 12.7% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 5.0% (better) | 3.9% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | −1.6% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 3.1% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 9.6% (better) | −2.6% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 53.0% (better) | 49.6% |
| Operating margin | 26.5% (better) | 14.7% |
| Net margin | – | 9.2% |
| FCF margin | 17.7% (better) | 15.5% |
| Return on equity | – | 15.3% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 11.9% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 0.81 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.03 (better) | 2.44 |
| Interest coverage | 14.5× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.11 (better) | 0.52 |
| Altman Z-score | 8.03 (better) | 3.62 |
| Piotroski F-score | – | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.4% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 12 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 7.0% | – |
| Buyback yield | 2.3% | 5.3% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 4.6% | 5.3% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 85.5% | 104% |
| Held by insiders | 0.29% | 1.0% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$65.4M | −$2.0M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.2% | 3.5% |
Go deeper
- ITW stock overview
- ITW income statement
- ITW valuation and score
- ZBRA stock overview
- ZBRA income statement
- ZBRA valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.