Agilent Technologies vs Waters
A and WAT 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 A and WAT compare
Agilent Technologies and Waters are about the same size, with market caps of $49.9B and $46.3B.
On earnings, Agilent Technologies is cheaper: it trades at 34.9× trailing earnings, against 202× for Waters.
Waters grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (80.7% versus 8.6% for Agilent Technologies).
Agilent Technologies keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 19.5% compared with 1.8% at Waters.
Agilent Technologies pays a dividend yielding 0.58%; Waters does not pay one.
Agilent Technologies scores higher on the StockData Score (21 against 8 for Waters), 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 | A | WAT |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $49.9B | $46.3B |
| Share price | $176.95 | $470.90 |
| Change, 1 year | 20.9% | 25.0% |
| Change, 5 years | 7.7% | 34.7% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.03 | 0.93 |
| Employees | 18K | 7,600 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 21 (better) | 8 |
| Valuation score | 1 | 1 |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 1 |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 34.9× (better) | 202× |
| P/S | 6.8× (better) | 8.2× |
| P/B | 6.8× | 3.0× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 25.4× (better) | 189× |
| P/FCF | 39.4× (better) | 159× |
| PEG | 11.56 | – |
| FCF yield | 2.5% (better) | 0.63% |
| Fair value | $144.17 | $54.03 |
| Margin of safety | −22.7% (better) | −772% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 8.6% | 80.7% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 5.4% | 6.0% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 18.0% (better) | −84.8% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 18.7% (better) | −78.6% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 14.7% (better) | 5.2% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 53.8% | – |
| Operating margin | 22.2% (better) | 4.7% |
| Net margin | 19.5% (better) | 1.8% |
| FCF margin | 17.2% (better) | 5.2% |
| Return on equity | 21.0% (better) | 1.1% |
| Return on invested capital | 26.4% (better) | 2.2% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.04 (better) | 0.29 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.76 | 14.65 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 15.5× (better) | 1.5× |
| Current ratio | 2.05 (better) | 1.89 |
| Altman Z-score | 5.85 (better) | 4.11 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.58% | – |
| Payout ratio | 19.9% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 10 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 6.6% | – |
| Buyback yield | 0.76% (better) | 0.03% |
| Shareholder yield | 1.3% (better) | 0.03% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 92.8% | 101% |
| Held by insiders | 0.29% | 0.10% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$702K (better) | −$992K |
| Superinvestors holding | 3 | 3 |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.7% | 3.4% |
Go deeper
- A stock overview
- A income statement
- A valuation and score
- WAT stock overview
- WAT income statement
- WAT valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.