GLW vs APH

For growth investors, Amphenol Corporation (APH) is the stronger pick with 51.

7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 19. 1% for Corning Incorporated (GLW). Amphenol Corporation (APH) offers the better valuation at 41. 5x trailing P/E (29. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Corning Incorporated (GLW) 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, Amphenol Corporation (APH) is the cheapest at 41.

5x versus Corning Incorporated at 98. 1x. On forward P/E, Amphenol Corporation is actually cheaper at 29. 7x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Amphenol Corporation wins at 1. 07x versus Corning Incorporated's 2. 06x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.

Over the past 5 years, Amphenol Corporation (APH) delivered a total return of +321.

4%, compared to +309. 5% for Corning Incorporated (GLW). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GLW returned +934. 0% versus APH's +917. 7%. 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), Amphenol Corporation (APH) is the lower-risk stock at 1.

62β versus Corning Incorporated's 1. 90β — meaning GLW is approximately 18% more volatile than APH relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Corning Incorporated (GLW) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 83% versus 115% for Amphenol Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Amphenol Corporation (APH) is pulling ahead at 51.

7% versus 19. 1% for Corning Incorporated (GLW). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Corning Incorporated grew EPS 219. 0% year-over-year, compared to 74. 0% for Amphenol Corporation. 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.

Amphenol Corporation (APH) is the more profitable company, earning 18.

5% net margin versus 10. 2% for Corning Incorporated — 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 14. 9% for GLW. 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.

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 1. 07x versus Corning Incorporated's 2. 06x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Amphenol Corporation (APH) trades at 29. 7x forward P/E versus 57. 5x for Corning Incorporated — 27. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for APH: 30. 2% to $180. 33.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Corning Incorporated (GLW) offers the highest yield at 0. 6%, versus 0. 5% for Amphenol Corporation (APH).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Corning Incorporated (GLW) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (0.

6% yield, +934. 0% 10Y return). Amphenol Corporation (APH) carries a higher beta of 1. 62 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (GLW: +934. 0%, APH: +917. 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.

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

GLW pays 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.