Texas Instruments vs Vertiv
TXN and VRT 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 TXN and VRT compare
Texas Instruments is the larger company, worth 3.6 times as much as Vertiv ($283B against $79.5B).
On earnings, Vertiv is cheaper: it trades at 38.6× trailing earnings, against 40.2× for Texas Instruments.
Vertiv grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (35.3% versus 20.3% for Texas Instruments).
Texas Instruments keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 34.3% compared with 16.0% at Vertiv.
Both pay dividends: Texas Instruments yields 1.9% and Vertiv 0.12%.
Vertiv scores higher on the StockData Score (20 against 15 for Texas Instruments), 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 | TXN | VRT |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $283B | $79.5B |
| Share price | $309.81 | $206.51 |
| Change, 1 year | 92.9% | 9.9% |
| Change, 5 years | 58.7% | 665% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.14 | 2.17 |
| Employees | 33K | 34K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 15 | 20 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Growth score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Performance score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 40.2× | 38.6× (better) |
| P/S | 13.6× | 6.1× (better) |
| P/B | 14.8× | 14.5× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 34.1× | 25.8× (better) |
| P/FCF | 38.7× | 25.3× (better) |
| FCF yield | 2.6% | 4.0% (better) |
| Fair value | $225.01 | $234.92 |
| Margin of safety | −37.7% | 12.1% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 20.3% | 35.3% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.1% | 18.5% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 41.0% | 103% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 41.0% | 102% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −1.8% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 60.2% (better) | 38.1% |
| Operating margin | 40.8% (better) | 20.1% |
| Net margin | 34.3% (better) | 16.0% |
| FCF margin | 35.2% (better) | 24.0% |
| Return on equity | 39.7% | 46.6% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 29.6% | 42.8% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.71 | 0.53 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.64 (better) | −0.19 |
| Interest coverage | – | 73.2× |
| Current ratio | 5.59 (better) | 1.39 |
| Altman Z-score | 13.46 (better) | 5.39 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.9% (better) | 0.12% |
| Payout ratio | 72.7% | 4.6% |
| Years of dividend growth | 16 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 8.1% | – |
| Buyback yield | 0.22% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 2.1% (better) | 0.12% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 89.4% | 81.9% |
| Held by insiders | 0.16% | 1.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$124M (better) | −$127M |
| Superinvestors holding | 8 (better) | 3 |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.0% | 2.9% |
Go deeper
- TXN stock overview
- TXN income statement
- TXN valuation and score
- VRT stock overview
- VRT income statement
- VRT valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.