Monolithic Power Systems vs Vishay Intertechnology
MPWR and VSH 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 MPWR and VSH compare
Monolithic Power Systems is the larger company, worth 17 times as much as Vishay Intertechnology ($68.3B against $4.1B).
On earnings, Vishay Intertechnology is cheaper: it trades at 42.9× trailing earnings, against 84.9× for Monolithic Power Systems.
Monolithic Power Systems grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (28.7% versus 17.6% for Vishay Intertechnology).
Monolithic Power Systems keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 24.5% compared with 2.7% at Vishay Intertechnology.
Both pay dividends: Monolithic Power Systems yields 0.54% and Vishay Intertechnology 1.5%.
Monolithic Power Systems scores higher on the StockData Score (18 against 9 for Vishay Intertechnology), 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 | MPWR | VSH |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $68.3B | $4.1B |
| Share price | $1390.54 | $26.62 |
| Change, 1 year | 45.1% | 87.6% |
| Change, 5 years | 144% | 23.2% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.89 | 1.42 |
| Employees | 4,501 | 23K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 18 (better) | 9 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 84.9× | 42.9× (better) |
| P/S | 20.9× | 1.2× (better) |
| P/B | 17.5× | 1.4× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 66.9× | 8.9× (better) |
| P/FCF | 117× | 35.2× (better) |
| PEG | 6.84 | – |
| FCF yield | 0.86% | 2.8% (better) |
| Fair value | $692.84 | $26.98 |
| Margin of safety | −101% | 1.3% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 28.7% (better) | 17.6% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 27.0% (better) | 4.2% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −52.0% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −52.5% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 29.7% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 55.2% (better) | 22.5% |
| Operating margin | 28.7% (better) | 5.2% |
| Net margin | 24.5% (better) | 2.7% |
| FCF margin | 17.9% (better) | 3.3% |
| Return on equity | 22.6% (better) | 3.8% |
| Return on invested capital | 33.7% (better) | 4.6% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.25 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | −0.98 |
| Interest coverage | – | 5.0× |
| Current ratio | 4.98 (better) | 3.31 |
| Altman Z-score | 54.57 (better) | 2.76 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.54% | 1.5% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 41.1% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 8 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 25.6% (better) | 1.0% |
| Buyback yield | – | −0.00% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.54% | 1.5% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 96.9% | 99.4% |
| Held by insiders | 3.6% | 1.2% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$579M | −$594K (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.4% | 10.5% |
Go deeper
- MPWR stock overview
- MPWR income statement
- MPWR valuation and score
- VSH stock overview
- VSH income statement
- VSH valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.