Oshkosh vs Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies
OSK and WAB side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How OSK and WAB compare
Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies is the larger company, worth 5.5 times as much as Oshkosh ($47.2B against $8.6B).
Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (13.4% versus −0.68% for Oshkosh).
Both pay dividends: Oshkosh yields 1.6% and Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies 0.42%.
Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies scores higher on the StockData Score (17 against 11 for Oshkosh), 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 | OSK | WAB |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $8.6B | $47.2B |
| Share price | $139.94 | $279.60 |
| Change, 1 year | 12.1% | 38.7% |
| Change, 5 years | 21.5% | 197% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.05 | 0.98 |
| Employees | 18K | 31K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 11 | 17 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 2 | 5 (better) |
| Performance score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Dividend score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 37.6× |
| P/S | 0.8× (better) | 3.9× |
| P/B | 1.9× (better) | 4.2× |
| EV/EBITDA | 8.9× (better) | 21.2× |
| P/FCF | 10.3× (better) | 27.6× |
| PEG | – | 1.48 |
| FCF yield | 9.7% (better) | 3.6% |
| Fair value | $113.82 | $161.68 |
| Margin of safety | −22.9% (better) | −72.9% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −0.68% | 13.4% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.5% | 8.1% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 10.1% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 11.0% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 25.8% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 16.6% | 35.0% (better) |
| Operating margin | 8.1% | 16.4% (better) |
| Net margin | – | 10.6% |
| FCF margin | 8.0% | 14.3% (better) |
| Return on equity | – | 11.5% |
| Return on invested capital | 12.1% (better) | 9.4% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.26 (better) | 0.59 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.83 (better) | 2.35 |
| Interest coverage | – | 6.9× |
| Current ratio | 1.63 (better) | 1.12 |
| Altman Z-score | 3.20 | 3.49 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | – | 7 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.6% (better) | 0.42% |
| Payout ratio | – | 15.1% |
| Years of dividend growth | 11 (better) | 4 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 13.6% | 15.8% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 3.4% (better) | 1.1% |
| Shareholder yield | 5.0% (better) | 1.5% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 104% | 92.8% |
| Held by insiders | 0.79% | 1.1% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$2.0M (better) | −$41.9M |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.4% | 2.1% |
Go deeper
- OSK stock overview
- OSK income statement
- OSK valuation and score
- WAB stock overview
- WAB income statement
- WAB valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.