TE Connectivity vs Trane Technologies
TEL and TT side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How TEL and TT compare
Trane Technologies is the larger company, worth 1.5 times as much as TE Connectivity ($93.0B against $63.5B).
On earnings, TE Connectivity is cheaper: it trades at 19.8× trailing earnings, against 30.0× for Trane Technologies.
TE Connectivity grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (15.2% versus 10.3% for Trane Technologies).
TE Connectivity keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 16.4% compared with 13.6% at Trane Technologies.
Both pay dividends: TE Connectivity yields 1.0% and Trane Technologies 0.74%.
Trane Technologies scores higher on the StockData Score (23 against 17 for TE Connectivity), 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 | TEL | TT |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $63.5B | $93.0B |
| Share price | $219.41 | $424.84 |
| Change, 1 year | −11.4% | −2.0% |
| Change, 5 years | 32.8% | 117% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.22 | 1.13 |
| Employees | 104K | 45K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 17 | 23 (better) |
| Valuation score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Growth score | 4 | 4 |
| Performance score | 3 | 6 (better) |
| Health score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 4 | 4 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 19.8× (better) | 30.0× |
| P/S | 3.2× (better) | 4.0× |
| P/B | – | 10.2× |
| EV/EBITDA | 13.4× (better) | 21.3× |
| P/FCF | 18.7× (better) | 24.4× |
| PEG | 0.89 (better) | 1.49 |
| FCF yield | 5.4% (better) | 4.1% |
| Fair value | $200.37 | $473.33 |
| Margin of safety | −9.5% | 10.2% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 15.2% (better) | 10.3% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 5.9% | 11.4% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 76.6% (better) | 7.5% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 79.5% (better) | 8.9% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 10.2% | 29.8% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 36.2% | – |
| Operating margin | 20.1% (better) | 17.9% |
| Net margin | 16.4% (better) | 13.6% |
| FCF margin | 17.1% (better) | 16.4% |
| Return on equity | – | 36.1% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 25.0% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 0.46 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.78 (better) | 0.92 |
| Interest coverage | 32.2× (better) | 19.2× |
| Current ratio | 1.73 (better) | 1.12 |
| Altman Z-score | 5.16 | 6.02 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 9 (better) | 8 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.0% (better) | 0.74% |
| Payout ratio | 26.7% | 28.6% |
| Years of dividend growth | 16 (better) | 5 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 8.7% | 12.1% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 3.0% (better) | 1.7% |
| Shareholder yield | 4.0% (better) | 2.4% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 95.1% | 87.9% |
| Held by insiders | 0.13% | 0.22% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$26.0M (better) | −$75.5M |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.0% | 2.2% |
Go deeper
- TEL stock overview
- TEL income statement
- TEL valuation and score
- TT stock overview
- TT income statement
- TT valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.