Hardware, Equipment & Parts
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CTS vs KLIC vs VICR vs TXN vs MCHP
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Semiconductors
Hardware, Equipment & Parts
Semiconductors
Semiconductors
CTS vs KLIC vs VICR vs TXN vs MCHP — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Hardware, Equipment & Parts | Semiconductors | Hardware, Equipment & Parts | Semiconductors | Semiconductors |
| Market Cap | $1.77B | $5.37B | $11.57B | $262.15B | $53.62B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $556M | $768M | $453M | $18.44B | $4.37B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $69M | $3M | $119M | $5.37B | $-97M |
| Gross Margin | 38.7% | 48.0% | 57.3% | 57.3% | 55.4% |
| Operating Margin | 15.9% | 6.9% | 18.1% | 35.3% | 4.1% |
| Forward P/E | 25.4x | 27.3x | 92.5x | 38.1x | 63.2x |
| Total Debt | $122M | $39M | $13M | $15.39B | $5.67B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $82M | $216M | $403M | $3.23B | $772M |
CTS vs KLIC vs VICR vs TXN vs MCHP — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| CTS Corporation (CTS) | 100 | 289.4 | +189.4% |
| Kulicke and Soffa I… (KLIC) | 100 | 459.1 | +359.1% |
| Vicor Corporation (VICR) | 100 | 420.6 | +320.6% |
| Texas Instruments I… (TXN) | 100 | 242.5 | +142.5% |
| Microchip Technolog… (MCHP) | 100 | 206.4 | +106.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CTS vs KLIC vs VICR vs TXN vs MCHP
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CTS ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 1.63 vs VICR's 2.07
- Lower P/E (25.4x vs 63.2x)
KLIC lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
VICR carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 13.5%, EPS growth 17.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 0.7%
- 26.5% 10Y total return vs KLIC's 8.5%
- 13.5% revenue growth vs MCHP's -42.3%
- +5.2% vs CTS's +54.7%
TXN is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Dividend streak 22 yrs, beta 1.09, yield 1.9%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.09, Low D/E 94.6%, current ratio 4.35x
- Beta 1.09, yield 1.9%, current ratio 4.35x
- 29.1% margin vs MCHP's -2.2%
Among these 5 stocks, MCHP doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 13.5% revenue growth vs MCHP's -42.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (25.4x vs 63.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 29.1% margin vs MCHP's -2.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.09 vs VICR's 2.87 | |
| Dividends | 1.9% yield, 22-year raise streak, vs MCHP's 1.8%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +5.2% vs CTS's +54.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 16.6% ROA vs MCHP's -0.7%, ROIC 8.9% vs 1.8% |
CTS vs KLIC vs VICR vs TXN vs MCHP — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CTS vs KLIC vs VICR vs TXN vs MCHP — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
TXN leads in 2 of 6 categories
VICR leads 2 • CTS leads 1 • KLIC leads 0 • MCHP leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TXN leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TXN is the larger business by revenue, generating $18.4B annually — 40.7x VICR's $453M. TXN is the more profitable business, keeping 29.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to MCHP's -2.2%. On growth, KLIC holds the edge at +49.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $556M | $768M | $453M | $18.4B | $4.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $123M | $61M | $103M | $8.1B | $881M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $69M | $3M | $119M | $5.4B | -$97M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $88M | $4M | $119M | $3.7B | $820M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +38.7% | +48.0% | +57.3% | +57.3% | +55.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +15.9% | +6.9% | +18.1% | +35.3% | +4.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +12.4% | +0.4% | +26.2% | +29.1% | -2.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +15.8% | +0.6% | +26.3% | +20.2% | +18.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +10.9% | +49.8% | +11.5% | +18.6% | +15.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +34.1% | +141.5% | +3.4% | +32.0% | +164.2% |
Valuation Metrics
CTS leads this category, winning 6 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 28.2x trailing earnings, CTS trades at a 100% valuation discount to KLIC's 9999.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), CTS offers better value at 1.81x vs VICR's 2.19x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.8B | $5.4B | $11.6B | $262.1B | $53.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.8B | $5.2B | $11.2B | $274.3B | $58.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 28.20x | 9999.00x | 98.26x | 52.83x | -9999.00x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 25.41x | 27.28x | 92.55x | 38.12x | 63.20x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 1.81x | — | 2.19x | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 15.13x | 352.22x | 194.00x | 34.20x | 55.92x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 3.26x | 8.21x | 28.37x | 14.83x | 12.18x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 3.34x | 6.65x | 16.19x | 16.15x | 7.52x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 20.44x | 55.75x | 97.02x | 100.71x | 69.45x |
Profitability & Efficiency
VICR leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
TXN delivers a 32.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $32 in annual profit, vs $-1 for MCHP. VICR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.02x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to TXN's 0.95x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CTS scores 7/9 vs MCHP's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +12.5% | +0.4% | +18.7% | +32.5% | -1.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +8.9% | +0.3% | +16.6% | +15.5% | -0.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +11.1% | -0.3% | +8.9% | +15.8% | +1.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +12.8% | -0.3% | +5.7% | +19.0% | +2.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.22x | 0.05x | 0.02x | 0.95x | 0.80x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $40M | -$177M | -$390M | $12.2B | $4.9B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $82M | $216M | $403M | $3.2B | $772M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $122M | $39M | $13M | $15.4B | $5.7B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 18.18x | 4872.17x | — | 12.06x | 0.78x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
VICR leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in VICR five years ago would be worth $31,796 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $14,873 for MCHP. Over the past 12 months, VICR leads with a +524.2% total return vs CTS's +54.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors VICR at 81.4% vs MCHP's 12.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +40.9% | +112.8% | +119.5% | +63.8% | +53.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +54.7% | +226.2% | +524.2% | +77.2% | +105.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +49.1% | +124.6% | +496.6% | +85.2% | +40.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +93.8% | +130.0% | +218.0% | +72.2% | +48.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +264.1% | +853.9% | +2651.8% | +476.4% | +363.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +14.2% | +31.0% | +81.4% | +22.8% | +12.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CTS and TXN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
TXN is the less volatile stock with a 1.09 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than VICR's 2.87 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CTS currently trades 99.5% from its 52-week high vs VICR's 87.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.46x | 1.86x | 2.87x | 1.09x | 1.69x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $62.06 | $107.01 | $293.95 | $292.64 | $105.91 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $36.03 | $30.97 | $40.54 | $152.73 | $48.52 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +99.5% | +95.9% | +87.2% | +98.4% | +93.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 70.2 | 80.6 | 59.9 | 75.2 | 78.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 211K | 633K | 860K | 6.7M | 9.1M |
Analyst Outlook
TXN leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CTS as "Hold", KLIC as "Buy", VICR as "Buy", TXN as "Buy", MCHP as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 7.3% upside for MCHP (target: $106) vs -39.1% for KLIC (target: $63). For income investors, TXN offers the higher dividend yield at 1.90% vs CTS's 0.26%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $62.50 | $245.00 | $253.71 | $106.35 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 4 | 11 | 7 | 65 | 46 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.3% | +1.0% | — | +1.9% | +1.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 5 | 0 | 22 | 5 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.16 | $1.02 | — | $5.48 | $1.82 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +3.2% | +1.8% | +0.3% | +0.6% | +0.2% |
TXN leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Analyst Outlook). VICR leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). 1 tied.
CTS vs KLIC vs VICR vs TXN vs MCHP: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CTS or KLIC or VICR or TXN or MCHP a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Vicor Corporation (VICR) is the stronger pick with 13.
5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -42. 3% for Microchip Technology Incorporated (MCHP). CTS Corporation (CTS) offers the better valuation at 28. 2x trailing P/E (25. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Kulicke and Soffa Industries, Inc. (KLIC) a "Buy" — based on 11 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 — CTS or KLIC or VICR or TXN or MCHP?
On trailing P/E, CTS Corporation (CTS) is the cheapest at 28.
2x versus Kulicke and Soffa Industries, Inc. at 9999. 0x. On forward P/E, CTS Corporation is actually cheaper at 25. 4x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: CTS Corporation wins at 1. 63x versus Vicor Corporation's 2. 07x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CTS or KLIC or VICR or TXN or MCHP?
Over the past 5 years, Vicor Corporation (VICR) delivered a total return of +218.
0%, compared to +48. 7% for Microchip Technology Incorporated (MCHP). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: VICR returned +26. 5% versus CTS's +264. 1%. 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 — CTS or KLIC or VICR or TXN or MCHP?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Texas Instruments Incorporated (TXN) is the lower-risk stock at 1.
09β versus Vicor Corporation's 2. 87β — meaning VICR is approximately 163% more volatile than TXN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Vicor Corporation (VICR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 95% for Texas Instruments Incorporated — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CTS or KLIC or VICR or TXN or MCHP?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Vicor Corporation (VICR) is pulling ahead at 13.
5% versus -42. 3% for Microchip Technology Incorporated (MCHP). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Vicor Corporation grew EPS 1764% year-over-year, compared to -100. 1% for Microchip Technology Incorporated. Over a 3-year CAGR, VICR leads at 0. 7% 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 — CTS or KLIC or VICR or TXN or MCHP?
Vicor Corporation (VICR) is the more profitable company, earning 29.
1% net margin versus -0. 0% for Microchip Technology Incorporated — meaning it keeps 29. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: TXN leads at 34. 1% versus -0. 5% for KLIC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — TXN leads at 57. 0%, 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 CTS or KLIC or VICR or TXN or MCHP 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, CTS Corporation (CTS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 63x versus Vicor Corporation's 2. 07x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, CTS Corporation (CTS) trades at 25. 4x forward P/E versus 92. 5x for Vicor Corporation — 67. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MCHP: 7. 3% to $106. 35.
08Which pays a better dividend — CTS or KLIC or VICR or TXN or MCHP?
In this comparison, TXN (1.
9% yield), MCHP (1. 8% yield), KLIC (1. 0% yield), CTS (0. 3% yield) pay a dividend. VICR does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CTS or KLIC or VICR or TXN or MCHP better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Texas Instruments Incorporated (TXN) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1.
09), 1. 9% yield, +476. 4% 10Y return). Vicor Corporation (VICR) carries a higher beta of 2. 87 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (TXN: +476. 4%, VICR: +26. 5%), 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 CTS and KLIC and VICR and TXN and MCHP?
Both stocks operate in the Technology sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
KLIC, TXN, MCHP pay a dividend while CTS, VICR 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.