Kennametal vs SPX Technologies
KMT and SPXC side by side, both in industrial and commercial machinery and computer equipment. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How KMT and SPXC compare
SPX Technologies is the larger company, worth 3.6 times as much as Kennametal ($8.0B against $2.2B).
On earnings, Kennametal is cheaper: it trades at 6.6× trailing earnings, against 28.8× for SPX Technologies.
SPX Technologies grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (20.6% versus 19.8% for Kennametal).
Kennametal keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 14.5% compared with 11.3% at SPX Technologies.
Kennametal pays a dividend yielding 2.7%; SPX Technologies does not pay one.
Kennametal scores higher on the StockData Score (23 against 17 for SPX Technologies), 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 | KMT | SPXC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $2.2B | $8.0B |
| Share price | $29.10 | $159.95 |
| Change, 1 year | 27.1% | −20.0% |
| Change, 5 years | −24.5% | 141% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.04 | 1.07 |
| Employees | 8,073 | 4,700 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 23 (better) | 17 |
| Valuation score | 6 (better) | 3 |
| Growth score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Health score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 6.6× (better) | 28.8× |
| P/S | 0.9× (better) | 3.2× |
| P/B | 1.4× (better) | 3.4× |
| EV/EBITDA | 4.6× (better) | 15.9× |
| P/FCF | – | 26.4× |
| PEG | 0.15 | – |
| FCF yield | −3.6% | 3.8% (better) |
| Fair value | $99.34 | $194.47 |
| Margin of safety | 70.7% (better) | 17.8% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 19.8% | 20.6% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 5.1% | 15.0% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 268% (better) | 32.4% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 268% (better) | 24.7% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 46.7% (better) | 18.4% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 41.2% (better) | 40.2% |
| Operating margin | 20.1% (better) | 16.2% |
| Net margin | 14.5% (better) | 11.3% |
| FCF margin | −3.4% | 12.3% (better) |
| Return on equity | 24.0% (better) | 14.4% |
| Return on invested capital | 18.4% (better) | 11.9% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.44 | 0.26 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.96 | 0.84 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 16.5× (better) | 10.7× |
| Current ratio | 2.62 (better) | 1.82 |
| Altman Z-score | 3.16 | 4.36 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 | 7 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.7% | – |
| Payout ratio | 17.8% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 0.00% | – |
| Buyback yield | 0.46% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 3.2% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 105% | 94.6% |
| Held by insiders | 1.1% | 2.5% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$5.4M (better) | −$19.9M |
| Short interest, % of float | 8.8% | 3.7% |
Go deeper
- KMT stock overview
- KMT income statement
- KMT valuation and score
- SPXC stock overview
- SPXC income statement
- SPXC valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.