Rockwell Automation vs Teradyne
ROK and TER 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 ROK and TER compare
Rockwell Automation and Teradyne are about the same size, with market caps of $44.9B and $41.2B.
On earnings, Teradyne is cheaper: it trades at 30.3× trailing earnings, against 32.2× for Rockwell Automation.
Teradyne grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (74.9% versus 7.8% for Rockwell Automation).
Teradyne keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 27.5% compared with 15.7% at Rockwell Automation.
Both pay dividends: Rockwell Automation yields 1.4% and Teradyne 0.19%.
Teradyne scores higher on the StockData Score (21 against 19 for Rockwell Automation), 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 | ROK | TER |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $44.9B | $41.2B |
| Share price | $404.20 | $263.75 |
| Change, 1 year | 3.1% | 48.8% |
| Change, 5 years | 16.1% | 74.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.15 | 1.72 |
| Employees | 23K | 6,600 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 19 | 21 (better) |
| Valuation score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Growth score | 3 | 3 |
| Performance score | 5 | 5 |
| Health score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 32.2× | 30.3× (better) |
| P/S | 5.0× (better) | 8.2× |
| P/B | 12.6× | 11.2× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 22.4× (better) | 23.3× |
| P/FCF | 26.4× (better) | 40.2× |
| PEG | 19.90 | – |
| FCF yield | 3.8% (better) | 2.5% |
| Fair value | $427.72 | $281.75 |
| Margin of safety | 5.5% | 6.4% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 7.8% | 74.9% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 5.1% (better) | 0.44% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 62.1% | 210% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 63.5% | 217% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 1.6% (better) | −4.1% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 50.0% | 59.3% (better) |
| Operating margin | – | 32.1% |
| Net margin | 15.7% | 27.5% (better) |
| FCF margin | 18.9% | 20.5% (better) |
| Return on equity | 39.1% | 42.9% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | – | 47.3% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.92 (better) | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.33 (better) | −0.26 |
| Interest coverage | – | 147× |
| Current ratio | 1.03 | 2.08 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 5.07 | 17.05 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.4% (better) | 0.19% |
| Payout ratio | 43.9% | 5.8% |
| Years of dividend growth | 17 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 5.2% (better) | 3.7% |
| Buyback yield | 2.8% (better) | 0.87% |
| Shareholder yield | 4.2% (better) | 1.1% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 89.2% | 97.4% |
| Held by insiders | 0.29% | 0.24% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$38.9M | −$15.7M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.3% | 5.2% |
Go deeper
- ROK stock overview
- ROK income statement
- ROK valuation and score
- TER stock overview
- TER income statement
- TER valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.