Littelfuse vs Vishay Intertechnology
LFUS and VSH side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How LFUS and VSH compare
Littelfuse is the larger company, worth 2.4 times as much as Vishay Intertechnology ($10.0B against $4.1B).
Littelfuse grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (15.4% versus 13.4% for Vishay Intertechnology).
Vishay Intertechnology keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 0.86% compared with −0.31% at Littelfuse.
Both pay dividends: Littelfuse yields 0.78% and Vishay Intertechnology 1.5%.
Littelfuse scores higher on the StockData Score (11 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 | LFUS | VSH |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $10.0B | $4.1B |
| Share price | $393.08 | $26.74 |
| Change, 1 year | 55.7% | 54.7% |
| Change, 5 years | 22.9% | 30.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.31 | 1.38 |
| Employees | 17K | 23K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 11 (better) | 9 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 141× |
| P/S | 3.8× | 1.2× (better) |
| P/B | 3.8× | 1.4× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 105× | 11.1× (better) |
| P/FCF | 22.5× | – |
| FCF yield | 4.5% (better) | −0.17% |
| Fair value | $119.04 | $36.54 |
| Margin of safety | −230% | 26.8% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 15.4% (better) | 13.4% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 10.5% (better) | 4.2% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −108% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −117% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 39.3% (better) | 20.9% |
| Operating margin | 3.7% (better) | 3.3% |
| Net margin | −0.31% | 0.86% (better) |
| FCF margin | 17.0% (better) | −0.21% |
| Return on equity | −0.31% | 1.1% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 1.8% | 2.1% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.24 (better) | 0.33 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.01 (better) | −0.96 |
| Interest coverage | 3.2× (better) | 2.8× |
| Current ratio | 2.76 (better) | 1.80 |
| Altman Z-score | 5.96 (better) | 2.34 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.78% | 1.5% (better) |
| Years of dividend growth | 7 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 8.6% (better) | 1.0% |
| Buyback yield | 0.00% (better) | −0.00% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.78% | 1.5% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 99.7% | 99.4% |
| Held by insiders | 1.3% | 1.2% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$36.1M | – |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 5.3% | 10.9% |
Go deeper
- LFUS stock overview
- LFUS income statement
- LFUS 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.