Industrial - Pollution & Treatment Controls
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
ATMU vs CECO vs ITT vs HUBB vs FELE
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Industrial - Pollution & Treatment Controls
Industrial - Machinery
Electrical Equipment & Parts
Industrial - Machinery
ATMU vs CECO vs ITT vs HUBB vs FELE — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Industrial - Pollution & Treatment Controls | Industrial - Pollution & Treatment Controls | Industrial - Machinery | Electrical Equipment & Parts | Industrial - Machinery |
| Market Cap | $4.48B | $2.92B | $18.56B | $26.21B | $4.41B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.35B | $812M | $4.24B | $6.00B | $2.18B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $211M | $17M | $458M | $906M | $150M |
| Gross Margin | 39.2% | 34.3% | 35.5% | 35.5% | 35.2% |
| Operating Margin | 23.0% | 7.6% | 15.9% | 20.8% | 12.6% |
| Forward P/E | 18.8x | 48.8x | 27.1x | 25.0x | 21.8x |
| Total Debt | $570M | $25M | $927M | $2.61B | $280M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $236M | $33M | $1.74B | $483M | $100M |
ATMU vs CECO vs ITT vs HUBB vs FELE — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 23 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Atmus Filtration Te… (ATMU) | 100 | 264.4 | +164.4% |
| CECO Environmental … (CECO) | 100 | 756.3 | +656.3% |
| ITT Inc. (ITT) | 100 | 272.6 | +172.6% |
| Hubbell Incorporated (HUBB) | 100 | 174.6 | +74.6% |
| Franklin Electric C… (FELE) | 100 | 109.9 | +9.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ATMU vs CECO vs ITT vs HUBB vs FELE
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ATMU carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for value and quality.
- Lower P/E (18.8x vs 25.0x)
- 15.7% margin vs CECO's 2.1%
- 14.4% ROA vs CECO's 1.9%, ROIC 31.2% vs 10.0%
CECO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 38.8%, EPS growth 280.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 22.4%
- 12.8% 10Y total return vs HUBB's 410.7%
- 38.8% revenue growth vs HUBB's 3.8%
- +220.1% vs FELE's +17.7%
ITT is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.55 vs FELE's 2.50
Among these 5 stocks, HUBB doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
FELE ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 32 yrs, beta 0.92, yield 1.1%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.92, Low D/E 21.1%, current ratio 2.79x
- Beta 0.92, yield 1.1%, current ratio 2.79x
- Beta 0.92 vs HUBB's 1.38, lower leverage
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 38.8% revenue growth vs HUBB's 3.8% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (18.8x vs 25.0x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 15.7% margin vs CECO's 2.1% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.92 vs HUBB's 1.38, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.1% yield, 32-year raise streak, vs ITT's 0.7%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +220.1% vs FELE's +17.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 14.4% ROA vs CECO's 1.9%, ROIC 31.2% vs 10.0% |
ATMU vs CECO vs ITT vs HUBB vs FELE — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
ATMU vs CECO vs ITT vs HUBB vs FELE — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ATMU leads in 2 of 6 categories
FELE leads 2 • CECO leads 1 • ITT leads 0 • HUBB leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ATMU leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
HUBB is the larger business by revenue, generating $6.0B annually — 7.4x CECO's $812M. ATMU is the more profitable business, keeping 15.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CECO's 2.1%. On growth, ITT holds the edge at +32.7% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.3B | $812M | $4.2B | $6.0B | $2.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $333M | $86M | $781M | $1.5B | $322M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $211M | $17M | $458M | $906M | $150M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $158M | $4M | $485M | $909M | $169M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +39.2% | +34.3% | +35.5% | +35.5% | +35.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +23.0% | +7.6% | +15.9% | +20.8% | +12.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +15.7% | +2.1% | +10.8% | +15.1% | +6.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +11.7% | +0.5% | +11.4% | +15.2% | +7.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -100.0% | +21.5% | +32.7% | +11.1% | +9.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +9.3% | -91.8% | -33.1% | +8.3% | +13.4% |
Valuation Metrics
FELE leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 21.9x trailing earnings, ATMU trades at a 63% valuation discount to CECO's 59.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), ITT offers better value at 0.69x vs FELE's 3.53x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $4.5B | $2.9B | $18.6B | $26.2B | $4.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $4.8B | $2.9B | $17.7B | $28.3B | $4.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 21.94x | 59.40x | 33.98x | 29.81x | 30.75x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 18.79x | 48.83x | 27.11x | 25.01x | 21.77x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 2.78x | 1.39x | 0.69x | 1.43x | 3.53x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 15.10x | 38.01x | 21.44x | 20.81x | 13.82x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.54x | 3.77x | 4.71x | 4.48x | 2.07x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 12.00x | 9.22x | 4.06x | 6.85x | 3.41x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 30.10x | — | 33.91x | 29.97x | 22.81x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ATMU leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ATMU delivers a 58.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $59 in annual profit, vs $5 for CECO. CECO carries lower financial leverage with a 0.08x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to ATMU's 1.51x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ATMU scores 7/9 vs FELE's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +58.8% | +5.4% | +13.0% | +24.4% | +11.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +14.4% | +1.9% | +6.7% | +11.6% | +7.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +31.2% | +10.0% | +16.1% | +17.1% | +14.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +31.6% | +9.4% | +16.3% | +20.1% | +18.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 5 | 7 | 7 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.51x | 0.08x | 0.23x | 0.68x | 0.21x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $334M | -$8M | -$816M | $2.1B | $181M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $236M | $33M | $1.7B | $483M | $100M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $570M | $25M | $927M | $2.6B | $280M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 6.02x | 2.74x | 8.60x | 16.90x | 24.75x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CECO leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CECO five years ago would be worth $110,271 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $12,034 for FELE. Over the past 12 months, CECO leads with a +220.1% total return vs FELE's +17.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CECO at 88.7% vs FELE's 3.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +4.7% | +36.1% | +19.4% | +6.8% | +3.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +54.7% | +220.1% | +47.8% | +41.5% | +17.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +155.0% | +572.0% | +152.5% | +87.9% | +10.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +155.0% | +1002.7% | +115.8% | +159.4% | +20.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +155.0% | +1281.8% | +531.3% | +410.7% | +231.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +36.6% | +88.7% | +36.2% | +23.4% | +3.2% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ITT and FELE each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
FELE is the less volatile stock with a 0.92 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than HUBB's 1.38 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ITT currently trades 92.2% from its 52-week high vs ATMU's 82.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.34x | 1.36x | 1.23x | 1.38x | 0.92x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $66.50 | $90.25 | $225.26 | $565.50 | $111.53 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $34.58 | $24.71 | $140.43 | $349.40 | $83.42 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +82.5% | +90.2% | +92.2% | +87.2% | +89.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 40.4 | 75.7 | 58.7 | 41.2 | 54.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 996K | 673K | 879K | 546K | 281K |
Analyst Outlook
FELE leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ATMU as "Buy", CECO as "Buy", ITT as "Buy", HUBB as "Hold", FELE as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 10.6% upside for ITT (target: $230) vs -26.5% for ATMU (target: $40). For income investors, FELE offers the higher dividend yield at 1.11% vs ATMU's 0.38%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $40.33 | $86.20 | $229.67 | $535.14 | $100.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 5 | 15 | 22 | 17 | 11 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.4% | — | +0.7% | +1.1% | +1.1% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 2 | 0 | 13 | 12 | 32 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.21 | — | $1.39 | $5.35 | $1.11 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.4% | 0.0% | +2.8% | +0.9% | +3.8% |
ATMU leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). FELE leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
ATMU vs CECO vs ITT vs HUBB vs FELE: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ATMU or CECO or ITT or HUBB or FELE a better buy right now?
For growth investors, CECO Environmental Corp.
(CECO) is the stronger pick with 38. 8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 8% for Hubbell Incorporated (HUBB). Atmus Filtration Technologies Inc. (ATMU) offers the better valuation at 21. 9x trailing P/E (18. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Atmus Filtration Technologies Inc. (ATMU) a "Buy" — based on 5 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which has the better valuation — ATMU or CECO or ITT or HUBB or FELE?
On trailing P/E, Atmus Filtration Technologies Inc.
(ATMU) is the cheapest at 21. 9x versus CECO Environmental Corp. at 59. 4x. On forward P/E, Atmus Filtration Technologies Inc. is actually cheaper at 18. 8x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: ITT Inc. wins at 0. 55x versus Franklin Electric Co. , Inc. 's 2. 50x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ATMU or CECO or ITT or HUBB or FELE?
Over the past 5 years, CECO Environmental Corp.
(CECO) delivered a total return of +1003%, compared to +20. 3% for Franklin Electric Co. , Inc. (FELE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CECO returned +1282% versus ATMU's +155. 0%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — ATMU or CECO or ITT or HUBB or FELE?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Franklin Electric Co.
, Inc. (FELE) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 92β versus Hubbell Incorporated's 1. 38β — meaning HUBB is approximately 50% more volatile than FELE relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, CECO Environmental Corp. (CECO) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 8% versus 151% for Atmus Filtration Technologies Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ATMU or CECO or ITT or HUBB or FELE?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), CECO Environmental Corp.
(CECO) is pulling ahead at 38. 8% versus 3. 8% for Hubbell Incorporated (HUBB). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: CECO Environmental Corp. grew EPS 280. 6% year-over-year, compared to -15. 8% for Franklin Electric Co. , Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CECO leads at 22. 4% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.
06Which has better profit margins — ATMU or CECO or ITT or HUBB or FELE?
Hubbell Incorporated (HUBB) is the more profitable company, earning 15.
2% net margin versus 6. 5% for CECO Environmental Corp. — meaning it keeps 15. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: HUBB leads at 20. 8% versus 6. 7% for CECO. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FELE leads at 35. 5%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
07Is ATMU or CECO or ITT or HUBB or FELE more undervalued right now?
The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.
By this metric, ITT Inc. (ITT) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 55x versus Franklin Electric Co. , Inc. 's 2. 50x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Atmus Filtration Technologies Inc. (ATMU) trades at 18. 8x forward P/E versus 48. 8x for CECO Environmental Corp. — 30. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ITT: 10. 6% to $229. 67.
08Which pays a better dividend — ATMU or CECO or ITT or HUBB or FELE?
In this comparison, FELE (1.
1% yield), HUBB (1. 1% yield), ITT (0. 7% yield), ATMU (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. CECO does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is ATMU or CECO or ITT or HUBB or FELE better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Franklin Electric Co.
, Inc. (FELE) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 92), 1. 1% yield, +231. 4% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (FELE: +231. 4%, ATMU: +155. 0%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
10What are the main differences between ATMU and CECO and ITT and HUBB and FELE?
Both stocks operate in the Industrials sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: ATMU is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CECO is a small-cap high-growth stock; ITT is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; HUBB is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; FELE is a small-cap quality compounder stock. ITT, HUBB, FELE pay a dividend while ATMU, CECO do not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.