Electrical Equipment & Parts
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
ENS vs CLFD vs SBS vs GNRC vs AMTX
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Communication Equipment
Regulated Water
Industrial - Machinery
Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing
ENS vs CLFD vs SBS vs GNRC vs AMTX — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Electrical Equipment & Parts | Communication Equipment | Regulated Water | Industrial - Machinery | Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing |
| Market Cap | $8.19B | $519M | $21.77B | $15.65B | $213M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $3.74B | $136M | $37.34B | $4.33B | $209M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $313M | $-9M | $8.30B | $189M | $-74M |
| Gross Margin | 29.7% | 37.2% | 36.6% | 38.1% | 3.4% |
| Operating Margin | 11.6% | 1.4% | 32.2% | 7.5% | -13.4% |
| Forward P/E | 21.6x | 72.1x | 0.7x | 30.9x | — |
| Total Debt | $1.20B | $9M | $39.99B | $1.33B | $318M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $343M | $21M | $4.67B | $341M | $5M |
ENS vs CLFD vs SBS vs GNRC vs AMTX — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| EnerSys (ENS) | 100 | 352.2 | +252.2% |
| Clearfield, Inc. (CLFD) | 100 | 271.1 | +171.1% |
| Companhia de Saneam… (SBS) | 100 | 316.9 | +216.9% |
| Generac Holdings In… (GNRC) | 100 | 239.8 | +139.8% |
| Aemetis, Inc. (AMTX) | 100 | 390.0 | +290.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ENS vs CLFD vs SBS vs GNRC vs AMTX
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ENS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 1.0%, EPS growth 38.3%, 3Y rev CAGR 2.5%
- 0.4% yield, 3-year raise streak, vs SBS's 2.1%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
- +147.5% vs CLFD's +20.2%
CLFD ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth.
- 19.6% revenue growth vs AMTX's -22.3%
SBS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.82, yield 2.1%
- 5.3% 10Y total return vs GNRC's 6.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.82, Low D/E 94.4%, current ratio 1.12x
- PEG 0.01 vs ENS's 0.94
GNRC lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
Among these 5 stocks, AMTX doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 19.6% revenue growth vs AMTX's -22.3% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 22.2% margin vs AMTX's -35.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.82 vs CLFD's 1.79 | |
| Dividends | 0.4% yield, 3-year raise streak, vs SBS's 2.1%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +147.5% vs CLFD's +20.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 8.8% ROA vs AMTX's -29.3%, ROIC 13.1% vs -70.3% |
ENS vs CLFD vs SBS vs GNRC vs AMTX — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
ENS vs CLFD vs SBS vs GNRC vs AMTX — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
SBS leads in 2 of 6 categories
CLFD leads 1 • ENS leads 0 • GNRC leads 0 • AMTX leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SBS leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SBS is the larger business by revenue, generating $37.3B annually — 274.1x CLFD's $136M. SBS is the more profitable business, keeping 22.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to AMTX's -35.4%. On growth, AMTX holds the edge at +27.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $3.7B | $136M | $37.3B | $4.3B | $209M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $515M | $6M | $14.2B | $472M | -$21M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $313M | -$9M | $8.3B | $189M | -$74M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $441M | $15M | $13.1B | $419M | -$38M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +29.7% | +37.2% | +36.6% | +38.1% | +3.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +11.6% | +1.4% | +32.2% | +7.5% | -13.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +8.4% | -6.3% | +22.2% | +4.4% | -35.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +11.8% | +10.8% | +35.0% | +9.7% | -18.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +1.4% | -27.1% | -26.9% | +12.4% | +27.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -16.7% | -142.5% | +10.6% | +69.9% | +29.8% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — CLFD and SBS each lead in 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 13.0x trailing earnings, SBS trades at a 87% valuation discount to GNRC's 99.2x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), SBS offers better value at 0.24x vs ENS's 1.08x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $8.2B | $519M | $21.8B | $15.7B | $213M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $9.0B | $506M | $28.9B | $16.6B | $526M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 24.80x | -64.64x | 13.03x | 99.17x | -2.44x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 21.55x | 72.10x | 0.66x | 30.91x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 1.08x | — | 0.24x | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 16.00x | 61.46x | 10.08x | 34.39x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.26x | 3.46x | 2.89x | 3.72x | 1.02x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 4.70x | 2.05x | 2.55x | 5.99x | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 58.81x | 21.01x | — | 58.38x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
CLFD leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
SBS delivers a 20.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $20 in annual profit, vs $-3 for CLFD. CLFD carries lower financial leverage with a 0.03x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to SBS's 0.94x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CLFD scores 7/9 vs SBS's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +16.5% | -3.4% | +20.2% | +7.2% | — |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +7.7% | -3.0% | +8.8% | +3.4% | -29.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +13.6% | +0.6% | +13.1% | +5.9% | -70.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +15.7% | +0.8% | +15.2% | +6.9% | -19.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 7 | 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.63x | 0.03x | 0.94x | 0.51x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $859M | -$13M | $35.3B | $992M | $313M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $343M | $21M | $4.7B | $341M | $5M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.2B | $9M | $40.0B | $1.3B | $318M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 5.21x | 85.32x | 2.86x | 4.54x | -0.27x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
SBS leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in SBS five years ago would be worth $51,513 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,387 for AMTX. Over the past 12 months, ENS leads with a +147.5% total return vs CLFD's +20.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors SBS at 62.2% vs CLFD's 1.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +48.1% | +27.1% | +34.1% | +89.1% | +96.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +147.5% | +20.2% | +73.9% | +129.9% | +140.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +167.0% | +3.9% | +326.8% | +141.5% | +37.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +149.2% | -4.1% | +415.1% | -18.5% | -76.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +298.5% | +106.7% | +528.6% | +666.1% | +31.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +38.7% | +1.3% | +62.2% | +34.2% | +11.2% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — SBS and GNRC each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
SBS is the less volatile stock with a 0.82 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CLFD's 1.79 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. GNRC currently trades 99.0% from its 52-week high vs SBS's 23.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.71x | 1.79x | 0.82x | 1.69x | 1.46x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $226.78 | $46.76 | $26.61 | $269.58 | $3.80 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $76.60 | $24.01 | $3.78 | $113.96 | $1.22 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +98.3% | +80.2% | +23.9% | +99.0% | +82.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 77.0 | 57.1 | 52.8 | 77.8 | 58.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 323K | 146K | 19.2M | 895K | 1.8M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — ENS and SBS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ENS as "Buy", CLFD as "Buy", SBS as "Hold", GNRC as "Buy", AMTX as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 273.5% upside for SBS (target: $24) vs -43.9% for AMTX (target: $2). For income investors, SBS offers the higher dividend yield at 2.15% vs ENS's 0.42%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $189.67 | $43.00 | $23.79 | $271.22 | $1.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 16 | 8 | 7 | 39 | 7 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.4% | — | +2.1% | +0.0% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 3 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.93 | — | $0.68 | $0.00 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.9% | +3.2% | +0.4% | +0.9% | 0.0% |
SBS leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). CLFD leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
ENS vs CLFD vs SBS vs GNRC vs AMTX: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ENS or CLFD or SBS or GNRC or AMTX a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Clearfield, Inc.
(CLFD) is the stronger pick with 19. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -22. 3% for Aemetis, Inc. (AMTX). Companhia de Saneamento Básico do Estado de São Paulo - SABESP (SBS) offers the better valuation at 13. 0x trailing P/E (0. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate EnerSys (ENS) a "Buy" — based on 16 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 — ENS or CLFD or SBS or GNRC or AMTX?
On trailing P/E, Companhia de Saneamento Básico do Estado de São Paulo - SABESP (SBS) is the cheapest at 13.
0x versus Generac Holdings Inc. at 99. 2x. On forward P/E, Companhia de Saneamento Básico do Estado de São Paulo - SABESP is actually cheaper at 0. 7x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Companhia de Saneamento Básico do Estado de São Paulo - SABESP wins at 0. 01x versus EnerSys's 0. 94x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ENS or CLFD or SBS or GNRC or AMTX?
Over the past 5 years, Companhia de Saneamento Básico do Estado de São Paulo - SABESP (SBS) delivered a total return of +415.
1%, compared to -76. 1% for Aemetis, Inc. (AMTX). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GNRC returned +666. 1% versus AMTX's +31. 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 — ENS or CLFD or SBS or GNRC or AMTX?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Companhia de Saneamento Básico do Estado de São Paulo - SABESP (SBS) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
82β versus Clearfield, Inc. 's 1. 79β — meaning CLFD is approximately 118% more volatile than SBS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Clearfield, Inc. (CLFD) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 3% versus 94% for Companhia de Saneamento Básico do Estado de São Paulo - SABESP — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ENS or CLFD or SBS or GNRC or AMTX?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Clearfield, Inc.
(CLFD) is pulling ahead at 19. 6% versus -22. 3% for Aemetis, Inc. (AMTX). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: EnerSys grew EPS 38. 3% year-over-year, compared to -50. 1% for Generac Holdings Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, SBS leads at 19. 2% 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 — ENS or CLFD or SBS or GNRC or AMTX?
Companhia de Saneamento Básico do Estado de São Paulo - SABESP (SBS) is the more profitable company, earning 22.
2% net margin versus -37. 0% for Aemetis, Inc. — meaning it keeps 22. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: SBS leads at 32. 2% versus -17. 9% for AMTX. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — GNRC leads at 38. 3%, 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 ENS or CLFD or SBS or GNRC or AMTX 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, Companhia de Saneamento Básico do Estado de São Paulo - SABESP (SBS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 01x versus EnerSys's 0. 94x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Companhia de Saneamento Básico do Estado de São Paulo - SABESP (SBS) trades at 0. 7x forward P/E versus 72. 1x for Clearfield, Inc. — 71. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for SBS: 273. 5% to $23. 79.
08Which pays a better dividend — ENS or CLFD or SBS or GNRC or AMTX?
In this comparison, SBS (2.
1% yield), ENS (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. CLFD, GNRC, AMTX do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is ENS or CLFD or SBS or GNRC or AMTX better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Companhia de Saneamento Básico do Estado de São Paulo - SABESP (SBS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
82), 2. 1% yield, +528. 6% 10Y return). Clearfield, Inc. (CLFD) carries a higher beta of 1. 79 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (SBS: +528. 6%, CLFD: +106. 7%), 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 ENS and CLFD and SBS and GNRC and AMTX?
These companies operate in different sectors (ENS (Industrials) and CLFD (Technology) and SBS (Utilities) and GNRC (Industrials) and AMTX (Energy)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: ENS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CLFD is a small-cap high-growth stock; SBS is a mid-cap deep-value stock; GNRC is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; AMTX is a small-cap quality compounder stock. SBS pays a dividend while ENS, CLFD, GNRC, AMTX 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.