Roper Technologies vs Sensata Technologies
ROP and ST side by side, both in laboratory apparatus and analytical, optical, measuring, and controlling instruments. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How ROP and ST compare
Roper Technologies is the larger company, worth 7.9 times as much as Sensata Technologies ($46.1B against $5.9B).
On earnings, Roper Technologies is cheaper: it trades at 19.3× trailing earnings, against 67.1× for Sensata Technologies.
Roper Technologies grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (10.9% versus 0.80% for Sensata Technologies).
Roper Technologies keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 30.2% compared with 2.4% at Sensata Technologies.
Both pay dividends: Roper Technologies yields 0.78% and Sensata Technologies 1.2%.
Roper Technologies scores higher on the StockData Score (19 against 11 for Sensata 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 | ROP | ST |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $46.1B | $5.9B |
| Share price | $466.60 | $40.27 |
| Change, 1 year | 4.6% | 23.4% |
| Change, 5 years | −3.7% | −32.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.75 | 1.21 |
| Employees | 19K | 21K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 19 (better) | 11 |
| Valuation score | 6 (better) | 2 |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Health score | 3 | 3 |
| Dividend score | 3 | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 19.3× (better) | 67.1× |
| P/S | 5.6× | 1.6× (better) |
| P/B | 2.5× | 2.0× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 24.7× | 15.1× (better) |
| P/FCF | – | 10.1× |
| FCF yield | – | 9.9% |
| Fair value | $627.18 | $37.27 |
| Margin of safety | 25.6% (better) | −8.1% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 10.9% (better) | 0.80% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 14.5% (better) | 4.0% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 62.7% (better) | −19.3% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 69.6% (better) | −20.0% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 9.6% (better) | −27.4% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 69.5% (better) | 29.5% |
| Operating margin | 28.0% (better) | 7.5% |
| Net margin | 30.2% (better) | 2.4% |
| FCF margin | – | 15.3% |
| Return on equity | 13.1% (better) | 3.1% |
| Return on invested capital | 6.7% (better) | 2.8% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.61 (better) | 0.82 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 4.73 | 3.86 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 5.9× (better) | 2.0× |
| Current ratio | 0.55 | 2.29 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.83 (better) | 2.40 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.78% | 1.2% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 14.7% | 77.8% |
| Years of dividend growth | 14 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 10.1% | – |
| Buyback yield | – | 0.43% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.78% | 1.6% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 103% | 106% |
| Held by insiders | 0.37% | 1.0% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$13.5M | −$8.0M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 3 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 4.6% | 5.1% |
Go deeper
- ROP stock overview
- ROP income statement
- ROP valuation and score
- ST stock overview
- ST income statement
- ST valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.