Hardware, Equipment & Parts
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
ELTK vs APH vs TEL vs HUBB vs KFRC
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Hardware, Equipment & Parts
Hardware, Equipment & Parts
Electrical Equipment & Parts
Staffing & Employment Services
ELTK vs APH vs TEL vs HUBB vs KFRC — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Hardware, Equipment & Parts | Hardware, Equipment & Parts | Hardware, Equipment & Parts | Electrical Equipment & Parts | Staffing & Employment Services |
| Market Cap | $55M | $167.94B | $61.60B | $26.21B | $790M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $52M | $25.90B | $18.52B | $6.00B | $1.33B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $826K | $4.48B | $2.91B | $906M | $35M |
| Gross Margin | 15.4% | 37.3% | 35.4% | 35.5% | 27.2% |
| Operating Margin | 4.5% | 26.0% | 19.3% | 20.8% | 3.8% |
| Forward P/E | 68.7x | 27.1x | 18.4x | 24.9x | 18.1x |
| Total Debt | $6M | $15.50B | $6.55B | $2.61B | $70M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $2M | $11.13B | $1.25B | $483M | $2M |
ELTK vs APH vs TEL vs HUBB vs KFRC — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Eltek Ltd. (ELTK) | 100 | 185.2 | +85.2% |
| Amphenol Corporation (APH) | 100 | 530.4 | +430.4% |
| TE Connectivity Ltd. (TEL) | 100 | 253.8 | +153.8% |
| Hubbell Incorporated (HUBB) | 100 | 402.4 | +302.4% |
| Kforce Inc. (KFRC) | 100 | 143.9 | +43.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ELTK vs APH vs TEL vs HUBB vs KFRC
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ELTK ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.34, Low D/E 13.7%, current ratio 2.82x
- Beta 0.34, yield 2.3%, current ratio 2.82x
- Beta 0.34 vs APH's 1.62, lower leverage
APH carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 51.7%, EPS growth 74.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 22.3%
- 9.0% 10Y total return vs HUBB's 410.7%
- PEG 0.98 vs HUBB's 1.20
- 51.7% revenue growth vs KFRC's -5.4%
TEL lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
Among these 5 stocks, HUBB doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
KFRC is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability is your priority.
- Dividend streak 8 yrs, beta 0.53, yield 3.6%
- Lower P/E (18.1x vs 24.9x)
- 3.6% yield, 8-year raise streak, vs TEL's 1.3%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 51.7% revenue growth vs KFRC's -5.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (18.1x vs 24.9x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 17.3% margin vs ELTK's 1.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.34 vs APH's 1.62, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.6% yield, 8-year raise streak, vs TEL's 1.3% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +70.0% vs ELTK's -17.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.6% ROA vs ELTK's 1.3%, ROIC 28.3% vs 3.9% |
ELTK vs APH vs TEL vs HUBB vs KFRC — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
ELTK vs APH vs TEL vs HUBB vs KFRC — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
APH leads in 3 of 6 categories
KFRC leads 1 • ELTK leads 0 • TEL leads 0 • HUBB leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
APH leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
APH is the larger business by revenue, generating $25.9B annually — 500.2x ELTK's $52M. APH is the more profitable business, keeping 17.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ELTK's 1.6%. On growth, APH holds the edge at +58.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $52M | $25.9B | $18.5B | $6.0B | $1.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $4M | $7.9B | $4.3B | $1.5B | $56M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $826,000 | $4.5B | $2.9B | $906M | $35M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$5M | $4.6B | $3.4B | $909M | $43M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +15.4% | +37.3% | +35.4% | +35.5% | +27.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +4.5% | +26.0% | +19.3% | +20.8% | +3.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +1.6% | +17.3% | +15.7% | +15.1% | +2.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -9.6% | +17.9% | +18.3% | +15.2% | +3.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +23.1% | +58.4% | +14.5% | +11.1% | +0.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +24.1% | +66.0% | +8.3% | +2.2% |
Valuation Metrics
KFRC leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 22.1x trailing earnings, KFRC trades at a 68% valuation discount to ELTK's 68.7x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), HUBB offers better value at 1.43x vs APH's 1.47x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $55M | $167.9B | $61.6B | $26.2B | $790M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $59M | $172.3B | $66.9B | $28.3B | $858M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 68.69x | 40.90x | 34.08x | 29.81x | 22.05x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 27.14x | 18.39x | 24.95x | 18.05x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.47x | — | 1.43x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 13.31x | 24.99x | 16.52x | 20.81x | 15.42x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.07x | 7.27x | 3.60x | 4.48x | 0.59x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.20x | 12.92x | 4.93x | 6.85x | 6.17x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 38.36x | 19.23x | 29.97x | 16.88x |
Profitability & Efficiency
APH leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
APH delivers a 34.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $35 in annual profit, vs $2 for ELTK. ELTK carries lower financial leverage with a 0.14x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to APH's 1.15x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), HUBB scores 7/9 vs KFRC's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +1.9% | +34.6% | +22.5% | +24.4% | +27.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.3% | +13.6% | +11.5% | +11.6% | +9.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +3.9% | +28.3% | +14.1% | +17.1% | +19.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +4.7% | +25.5% | +16.9% | +20.1% | +20.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 6 | 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.14x | 1.15x | 0.51x | 0.68x | 0.56x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $4M | $4.4B | $5.3B | $2.1B | $68M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $2M | $11.1B | $1.3B | $483M | $2M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $6M | $15.5B | $6.5B | $2.6B | $70M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.32x | 13.54x | 31.48x | 16.90x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
APH leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in APH five years ago would be worth $40,876 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8,325 for KFRC. Over the past 12 months, APH leads with a +70.0% total return vs ELTK's -17.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors APH at 54.3% vs KFRC's -4.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -3.4% | -2.0% | -9.7% | +6.8% | +39.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -17.5% | +70.0% | +42.1% | +41.5% | +18.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +114.7% | +267.6% | +77.5% | +87.9% | -13.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +21.7% | +308.8% | +60.9% | +159.4% | -16.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +93.9% | +899.3% | +291.2% | +410.7% | +195.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +29.0% | +54.3% | +21.1% | +23.4% | -4.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ELTK and KFRC each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ELTK is the less volatile stock with a 0.34 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than APH's 1.62 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. KFRC currently trades 91.0% from its 52-week high vs ELTK's 67.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.32x | 1.57x | 1.60x | 1.32x | 0.46x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $12.19 | $167.04 | $252.56 | $565.50 | $47.48 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $7.73 | $79.27 | $147.80 | $349.40 | $24.49 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +67.6% | +81.8% | +83.1% | +87.2% | +91.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 46.7 | 45.1 | 49.8 | 41.2 | 65.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 3K | 8.3M | 2.3M | 546K | 305K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — APH and TEL and KFRC each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: APH as "Buy", TEL as "Buy", HUBB as "Hold", KFRC as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 64.3% upside for KFRC (target: $71) vs 10.6% for HUBB (target: $545). For income investors, KFRC offers the higher dividend yield at 3.58% vs APH's 0.46%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $180.89 | $262.57 | $545.43 | $71.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 29 | 29 | 17 | 10 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.3% | +0.5% | +1.3% | +1.1% | +3.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 15 | 15 | 12 | 8 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.19 | $0.63 | $2.69 | $5.35 | $1.55 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.4% | +2.2% | +0.9% | +6.4% |
APH leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). KFRC leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
ELTK vs APH vs TEL vs HUBB vs KFRC: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ELTK or APH or TEL or HUBB or KFRC a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Amphenol Corporation (APH) is the stronger pick with 51.
7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -5. 4% for Kforce Inc. (KFRC). Kforce Inc. (KFRC) offers the better valuation at 22. 1x trailing P/E (18. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Amphenol Corporation (APH) a "Buy" — based on 29 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 — ELTK or APH or TEL or HUBB or KFRC?
On trailing P/E, Kforce Inc.
(KFRC) is the cheapest at 22. 1x versus Eltek Ltd. at 68. 7x. On forward P/E, Kforce Inc. is actually cheaper at 18. 1x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Amphenol Corporation wins at 0. 98x versus Hubbell Incorporated's 1. 20x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ELTK or APH or TEL or HUBB or KFRC?
Over the past 5 years, Amphenol Corporation (APH) delivered a total return of +308.
8%, compared to -16. 8% for Kforce Inc. (KFRC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: APH returned +838. 2% versus ELTK's +90. 2%. 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 — ELTK or APH or TEL or HUBB or KFRC?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Eltek Ltd.
(ELTK) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 32β versus TE Connectivity Ltd. 's 1. 60β — meaning TEL is approximately 403% more volatile than ELTK relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Eltek Ltd. (ELTK) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 14% versus 115% for Amphenol Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ELTK or APH or TEL or HUBB or KFRC?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Amphenol Corporation (APH) is pulling ahead at 51.
7% versus -5. 4% for Kforce Inc. (KFRC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Amphenol Corporation grew EPS 74. 0% year-over-year, compared to -81. 0% for Eltek Ltd.. Over a 3-year CAGR, APH leads at 22. 3% 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 — ELTK or APH or TEL or HUBB or KFRC?
Amphenol Corporation (APH) is the more profitable company, earning 18.
5% net margin versus 1. 6% for Eltek Ltd. — meaning it keeps 18. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: APH leads at 25. 9% versus 3. 8% for KFRC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — APH leads at 36. 9%, 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 ELTK or APH or TEL or HUBB or KFRC 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, Amphenol Corporation (APH) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 98x versus Hubbell Incorporated's 1. 20x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Kforce Inc. (KFRC) trades at 18. 1x forward P/E versus 27. 1x for Amphenol Corporation — 9. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for KFRC: 64. 3% to $71. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — ELTK or APH or TEL or HUBB or KFRC?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Kforce Inc. (KFRC) offers the highest yield at 3. 6%, versus 0. 5% for Amphenol Corporation (APH).
09Is ELTK or APH or TEL or HUBB or KFRC better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Eltek Ltd.
(ELTK) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 32), 2. 3% yield). Amphenol Corporation (APH) carries a higher beta of 1. 57 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ELTK: +90. 2%, APH: +838. 2%), 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 ELTK and APH and TEL and HUBB and KFRC?
These companies operate in different sectors (ELTK (Technology) and APH (Technology) and TEL (Technology) and HUBB (Industrials) and KFRC (Industrials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: ELTK is a small-cap quality compounder stock; APH is a mid-cap high-growth stock; TEL is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; HUBB is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; KFRC is a small-cap income-oriented stock. ELTK, TEL, HUBB, KFRC pay a dividend while APH does 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.