Texas Instruments vs Vertiv
TXN and VRT side by side, both in electronic components and accessories. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How TXN and VRT compare
Texas Instruments is the larger company, worth 3.1 times as much as Vertiv ($275B against $89.5B).
On earnings, Texas Instruments is cheaper: it trades at 45.8× trailing earnings, against 52.6× for Vertiv.
Vertiv grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (26.2% versus 16.7% for Texas Instruments).
Texas Instruments keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 31.1% compared with 15.1% at Vertiv.
Both pay dividends: Texas Instruments yields 2.4% and Vertiv 0.11%.
Vertiv scores higher on the StockData Score (19 against 13 for Texas Instruments), 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 | TXN | VRT |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $275B | $89.5B |
| Share price | $300.84 | $232.50 |
| Change, 1 year | 87.7% | 16.7% |
| Change, 5 years | 55.6% | 741% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.12 | 2.15 |
| Employees | 33K | 34K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 13 | 19 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Growth score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Performance score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 45.8× (better) | 52.6× |
| P/S | 14.1× | 7.8× (better) |
| P/B | 15.3× (better) | 18.8× |
| EV/EBITDA | 38.8× | 35.0× (better) |
| P/FCF | 51.3× | 30.6× (better) |
| FCF yield | 1.9% | 3.3% (better) |
| Fair value | $190.34 | $196.85 |
| Margin of safety | −58.1% | −18.1% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 16.7% | 26.2% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.1% | 18.5% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 20.1% | 113% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 20.3% | 111% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −1.8% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 58.3% (better) | 38.0% |
| Operating margin | 37.3% (better) | 18.9% |
| Net margin | 31.1% (better) | 15.1% |
| FCF margin | 27.5% (better) | 25.5% |
| Return on equity | 35.2% | 43.9% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 25.3% | 38.4% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.78 | 0.62 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.97 | 0.05 (better) |
| Interest coverage | – | 41.4× |
| Current ratio | 4.86 (better) | 1.38 |
| Altman Z-score | 12.92 (better) | 6.36 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.4% (better) | 0.11% |
| Payout ratio | 84.5% | 5.0% |
| Years of dividend growth | 16 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 8.1% | – |
| Buyback yield | 0.26% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 2.7% (better) | 0.11% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 89.5% | 81.9% |
| Held by insiders | 0.16% | 1.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$119M (better) | −$128M |
| Superinvestors holding | 8 (better) | 3 |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.2% | 3.8% |
Go deeper
- TXN stock overview
- TXN income statement
- TXN valuation and score
- VRT stock overview
- VRT income statement
- VRT valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.