EPAC vs KMT vs GTLS

For growth investors, Enerpac Tool Group Corp.

(EPAC) is the stronger pick with 4. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 9% for Kennametal Inc. (KMT). Enerpac Tool Group Corp. (EPAC) offers the better valuation at 20. 9x trailing P/E (18. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Chart Industries, Inc. (GTLS) a "Buy" — based on 37 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, Enerpac Tool Group Corp.

(EPAC) is the cheapest at 20. 9x versus Chart Industries, Inc. at 628. 5x. On forward P/E, Chart Industries, Inc. is actually cheaper at 16. 4x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Chart Industries, Inc.

(GTLS) delivered a total return of +29. 5%, compared to +9. 3% for Kennametal Inc. (KMT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GTLS returned +772. 5% versus EPAC's +40. 3%. 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), Chart Industries, Inc.

(GTLS) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 56β versus Kennametal Inc. 's 1. 31β — meaning KMT is approximately 135% more volatile than GTLS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Kennametal Inc. (KMT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 49% versus 111% for Chart Industries, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Enerpac Tool Group Corp.

(EPAC) is pulling ahead at 4. 6% versus -3. 9% for Kennametal Inc. (KMT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Enerpac Tool Group Corp. grew EPS 9. 0% year-over-year, compared to -92. 0% for Chart Industries, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, GTLS leads at 38. 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.

Enerpac Tool Group Corp.

(EPAC) is the more profitable company, earning 15. 0% net margin versus 1. 0% for Chart Industries, Inc. — meaning it keeps 15. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: EPAC leads at 22. 6% versus 7. 3% for KMT. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — EPAC leads at 49. 6%, 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, Chart Industries, Inc.

(GTLS) trades at 16. 4x forward P/E versus 18. 8x for Enerpac Tool Group Corp. — 2. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for EPAC: 4. 1% to $37. 00.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Kennametal Inc. (KMT) offers the highest yield at 1. 9%, versus 0. 1% for Enerpac Tool Group Corp. (EPAC).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Chart Industries, Inc.

(GTLS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 56), +772. 5% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (GTLS: +772. 5%, EPAC: +40. 3%), 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.

KMT pays a dividend while EPAC, GTLS 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.