Hubbell vs ON Semiconductor
HUBB and ON 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 HUBB and ON compare
ON Semiconductor is the larger company, worth 1.2 times as much as Hubbell ($27.7B against $23.1B).
On earnings, Hubbell is cheaper: it trades at 25.6× trailing earnings, against 41.3× for ON Semiconductor.
Hubbell grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (16.0% versus 2.9% for ON Semiconductor).
Hubbell keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 13.8% compared with 10.8% at ON Semiconductor.
Hubbell pays a dividend yielding 1.3%; ON Semiconductor does not pay one.
Hubbell scores higher on the StockData Score (17 against 9 for ON Semiconductor), 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 | HUBB | ON |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $23.1B | $27.7B |
| Share price | $436.98 | $71.06 |
| Change, 1 year | −3.5% | 44.2% |
| Change, 5 years | 108% | 12.2% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.96 | 1.62 |
| Employees | 18K | 26K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 17 (better) | 9 |
| Valuation score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 2 |
| Health score | 2 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 25.6× (better) | 41.3× |
| P/S | 3.5× (better) | 4.3× |
| P/B | 5.6× | 3.7× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 17.3× (better) | 17.8× |
| P/FCF | 24.9× | 17.1× (better) |
| PEG | 1.42 | – |
| FCF yield | 4.0% | 5.8% (better) |
| Fair value | $448.21 | $53.28 |
| Margin of safety | 2.5% (better) | −33.4% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 16.0% (better) | 2.9% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.7% (better) | 2.7% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 5.6% | 116% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 6.5% | 123% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 20.8% (better) | −12.3% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 35.4% | 38.7% (better) |
| Operating margin | 20.2% (better) | 12.3% |
| Net margin | 13.8% (better) | 10.8% |
| FCF margin | 14.1% | 25.4% (better) |
| Return on equity | 23.3% (better) | 8.9% |
| Return on invested capital | 15.1% (better) | 7.7% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.25 | 0.59 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.95 | 0.06 (better) |
| Interest coverage | – | 13.6× |
| Current ratio | 1.53 | 3.55 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.81 | 4.62 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.3% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 16 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 7.7% | – |
| Buyback yield | 0.88% | 4.2% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 2.2% | 4.2% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 96.7% | 104% |
| Held by insiders | 0.41% | 0.52% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$18.3M (better) | −$21.3M |
| Short interest, % of float | 5.0% | 7.4% |
Go deeper
- HUBB stock overview
- HUBB income statement
- HUBB valuation and score
- ON stock overview
- ON income statement
- ON valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.