ENR vs PBI

For growth investors, Energizer Holdings, Inc.

(ENR) is the stronger pick with 2. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -6. 6% for Pitney Bowes Inc. (PBI). Energizer Holdings, Inc. (ENR) offers the better valuation at 5. 7x trailing P/E (5. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Energizer Holdings, Inc. (ENR) a "Hold" — based on 24 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.

On trailing P/E, Energizer Holdings, Inc.

(ENR) is the cheapest at 5. 7x versus Pitney Bowes Inc. at 17. 9x. On forward P/E, Energizer Holdings, Inc. is actually cheaper at 5. 7x.

Over the past 5 years, Pitney Bowes Inc.

(PBI) delivered a total return of +113. 9%, compared to -49. 4% for Energizer Holdings, Inc. (ENR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: PBI returned +1. 8% versus ENR's -28. 8%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Pitney Bowes Inc.

(PBI) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 07β versus Energizer Holdings, Inc. 's 1. 24β — meaning ENR is approximately 16% more volatile than PBI relative to the S&P 500.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Energizer Holdings, Inc.

(ENR) is pulling ahead at 2. 3% versus -6. 6% for Pitney Bowes Inc. (PBI). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Energizer Holdings, Inc. grew EPS 538. 5% year-over-year, compared to 174. 3% for Pitney Bowes Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ENR leads at -1. 1% 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.

Energizer Holdings, Inc.

(ENR) is the more profitable company, earning 8. 1% net margin versus 7. 6% for Pitney Bowes Inc. — meaning it keeps 8. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: PBI leads at 20. 4% versus 17. 8% for ENR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — PBI leads at 54. 1%, 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.

On forward earnings alone, Energizer Holdings, Inc.

(ENR) trades at 5. 7x forward P/E versus 9. 9x for Pitney Bowes Inc. — 4. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ENR: 22. 3% to $23. 20.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Energizer Holdings, Inc. (ENR) offers the highest yield at 6. 4%, versus 2. 0% for Pitney Bowes Inc. (PBI).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Pitney Bowes Inc.

(PBI) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 07), 2. 0% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (PBI: +1. 8%, ENR: -28. 8%), 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.

Both stocks operate in the Industrials sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

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.