Electrical Equipment & Parts
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
HUBB vs POWL vs ETN vs ROK vs EMR
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Electrical Equipment & Parts
Industrial - Machinery
Industrial - Machinery
Industrial - Machinery
HUBB vs POWL vs ETN vs ROK vs EMR — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Electrical Equipment & Parts | Electrical Equipment & Parts | Industrial - Machinery | Industrial - Machinery | Industrial - Machinery |
| Market Cap | $26.21B | $11.14B | $155.02B | $50.37B | $79.02B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $6.00B | $1.13B | $28.52B | $8.80B | $18.32B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $906M | $187M | $3.99B | $1.09B | $2.44B |
| Gross Margin | 35.5% | 30.1% | 36.9% | 52.5% | 52.7% |
| Operating Margin | 20.8% | 19.8% | 18.1% | 19.1% | 19.8% |
| Forward P/E | 25.0x | 55.4x | 30.0x | 36.9x | 21.7x |
| Total Debt | $2.61B | $2M | $11.17B | $3.65B | $13.76B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $483M | $451M | $622M | $468M | $1.54B |
HUBB vs POWL vs ETN vs ROK vs EMR — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hubbell Incorporated (HUBB) | 100 | 402.8 | +302.8% |
| Powell Industries, … (POWL) | 100 | 3449.0 | +3349.0% |
| Eaton Corporation p… (ETN) | 100 | 470.2 | +370.2% |
| Rockwell Automation… (ROK) | 100 | 207.4 | +107.4% |
| Emerson Electric Co. (EMR) | 100 | 231.2 | +131.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: HUBB vs POWL vs ETN vs ROK vs EMR
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
HUBB is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.38, Low D/E 67.6%, current ratio 1.72x
POWL carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 9.1%, EPS growth 20.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 27.5%
- 26.5% 10Y total return vs ETN's 6.1%
- PEG 0.92 vs EMR's 4.81
- 16.5% margin vs ROK's 12.4%
ETN ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth.
- 10.3% revenue growth vs ROK's 1.0%
ROK is the clearest fit if your priority is defensive.
- Beta 1.33, yield 1.2%, current ratio 1.14x
- Beta 1.33 vs POWL's 1.95
EMR is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability is your priority.
- Dividend streak 37 yrs, beta 1.52, yield 1.5%
- Lower P/E (21.7x vs 36.9x)
- 1.5% yield, 37-year raise streak, vs HUBB's 1.1%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 10.3% revenue growth vs ROK's 1.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (21.7x vs 36.9x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 16.5% margin vs ROK's 12.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.33 vs POWL's 1.95 | |
| Dividends | 1.5% yield, 37-year raise streak, vs HUBB's 1.1% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +425.5% vs EMR's +30.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 16.9% ROA vs EMR's 5.8%, ROIC 90.6% vs 8.2% |
HUBB vs POWL vs ETN vs ROK vs EMR — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
HUBB vs POWL vs ETN vs ROK vs EMR — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
EMR leads in 3 of 6 categories
POWL leads 2 • ROK leads 1 • HUBB leads 0 • ETN leads 0
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
EMR leads this category, winning 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ETN is the larger business by revenue, generating $28.5B annually — 25.2x POWL's $1.1B. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from 16.5% (POWL) to 12.4% (ROK). On growth, ETN holds the edge at +16.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $6.0B | $1.1B | $28.5B | $8.8B | $18.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $1.5B | $232M | $5.9B | $1.9B | $4.7B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $906M | $187M | $4.0B | $1.1B | $2.4B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $909M | $143M | $4.7B | $1.3B | $3.1B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +35.5% | +30.1% | +36.9% | +52.5% | +52.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +20.8% | +19.8% | +18.1% | +19.1% | +19.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +15.1% | +16.5% | +14.0% | +12.4% | +13.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +15.2% | +12.6% | +16.5% | +15.2% | +17.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +11.1% | +6.5% | +16.8% | +11.8% | +2.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +8.3% | -0.8% | -9.4% | +39.6% | +28.2% |
Valuation Metrics
EMR leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 29.8x trailing earnings, HUBB trades at a 52% valuation discount to POWL's 61.8x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), POWL offers better value at 1.03x vs EMR's 7.73x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $26.2B | $11.1B | $155.0B | $50.4B | $79.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $28.3B | $10.7B | $165.6B | $53.6B | $91.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 29.81x | 61.76x | 38.17x | 58.45x | 34.92x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 25.01x | 55.38x | 30.00x | 36.93x | 21.71x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 1.43x | 1.03x | 1.55x | — | 7.73x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 20.81x | 47.51x | 27.69x | 30.64x | 18.07x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 4.48x | 10.09x | 5.65x | 6.04x | 4.39x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 6.85x | 17.43x | 7.99x | 13.66x | 3.94x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 29.97x | 72.00x | 34.67x | 37.09x | 29.63x |
Profitability & Efficiency
POWL leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ROK delivers a 29.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $30 in annual profit, vs $12 for EMR. POWL carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to ROK's 0.98x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ROK scores 8/9 vs POWL's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +24.4% | +28.6% | +20.8% | +29.6% | +12.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +11.6% | +16.9% | +9.0% | +9.7% | +5.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +17.1% | +90.6% | +13.6% | +15.1% | +8.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +20.1% | +37.5% | +16.8% | +18.5% | +10.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 5 | 6 | 8 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.68x | 0.00x | 0.57x | 0.98x | 0.68x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $2.1B | -$449M | $10.5B | $3.2B | $12.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $483M | $451M | $622M | $468M | $1.5B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $2.6B | $2M | $11.2B | $3.6B | $13.8B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 16.90x | — | 16.38x | 9.06x | 6.46x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
POWL leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in POWL five years ago would be worth $252,824 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $15,945 for EMR. Over the past 12 months, POWL leads with a +425.5% total return vs EMR's +30.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors POWL at 161.5% vs ROK's 18.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +6.8% | +160.4% | +22.3% | +12.8% | +4.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +41.5% | +425.5% | +33.2% | +60.2% | +30.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +87.9% | +1689.0% | +141.3% | +65.0% | +75.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +159.4% | +2428.2% | +182.8% | +74.6% | +59.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +410.7% | +2652.9% | +608.7% | +341.0% | +206.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +23.4% | +161.5% | +34.1% | +18.2% | +20.7% |
Risk & Volatility
ROK leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ROK is the less volatile stock with a 1.33 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than POWL's 1.95 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ROK currently trades 96.7% from its 52-week high vs POWL's 70.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.38x | 1.95x | 1.42x | 1.33x | 1.52x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $565.50 | $434.00 | $435.43 | $463.49 | $165.15 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $349.40 | $54.75 | $296.93 | $277.66 | $108.37 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +87.2% | +70.5% | +91.7% | +96.7% | +85.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 41.2 | 83.2 | 59.8 | 74.9 | 61.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 546K | 691K | 2.5M | 831K | 2.8M |
Analyst Outlook
EMR leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: HUBB as "Hold", POWL as "Hold", ETN as "Buy", ROK as "Hold", EMR as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 14.8% upside for EMR (target: $162) vs -30.2% for POWL (target: $214). For income investors, EMR offers the higher dividend yield at 1.49% vs POWL's 0.12%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $535.14 | $213.67 | $379.78 | $436.56 | $161.92 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 17 | 9 | 39 | 39 | 41 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.1% | +0.1% | +1.0% | +1.2% | +1.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 12 | 2 | 24 | 20 | 37 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $5.35 | $0.35 | $4.17 | $5.23 | $2.10 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.9% | +0.1% | +1.2% | +0.8% | +1.6% |
EMR leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). POWL leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns).
HUBB vs POWL vs ETN vs ROK vs EMR: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is HUBB or POWL or ETN or ROK or EMR a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Eaton Corporation plc (ETN) is the stronger pick with 10.
3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 0% for Rockwell Automation, Inc. (ROK). Hubbell Incorporated (HUBB) offers the better valuation at 29. 8x trailing P/E (25. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Eaton Corporation plc (ETN) a "Buy" — based on 39 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 — HUBB or POWL or ETN or ROK or EMR?
On trailing P/E, Hubbell Incorporated (HUBB) is the cheapest at 29.
8x versus Powell Industries, Inc. at 61. 8x. On forward P/E, Emerson Electric Co. is actually cheaper at 21. 7x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Powell Industries, Inc. wins at 0. 92x versus Emerson Electric Co. 's 4. 81x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — HUBB or POWL or ETN or ROK or EMR?
Over the past 5 years, Powell Industries, Inc.
(POWL) delivered a total return of +24. 3%, compared to +59. 5% for Emerson Electric Co. (EMR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: POWL returned +26. 5% versus EMR's +206. 6%. 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 — HUBB or POWL or ETN or ROK or EMR?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Rockwell Automation, Inc.
(ROK) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 33β versus Powell Industries, Inc. 's 1. 95β — meaning POWL is approximately 47% more volatile than ROK relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Powell Industries, Inc. (POWL) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 98% for Rockwell Automation, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — HUBB or POWL or ETN or ROK or EMR?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Eaton Corporation plc (ETN) is pulling ahead at 10.
3% versus 1. 0% for Rockwell Automation, Inc. (ROK). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Powell Industries, Inc. grew EPS 20. 9% year-over-year, compared to -7. 4% for Rockwell Automation, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, POWL leads at 27. 5% 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 — HUBB or POWL or ETN or ROK or EMR?
Powell Industries, Inc.
(POWL) is the more profitable company, earning 16. 4% net margin versus 10. 4% for Rockwell Automation, Inc. — meaning it keeps 16. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: HUBB leads at 20. 8% versus 17. 1% for ROK. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — EMR leads at 52. 8%, 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 HUBB or POWL or ETN or ROK or EMR 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, Powell Industries, Inc. (POWL) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 92x versus Emerson Electric Co. 's 4. 81x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Emerson Electric Co. (EMR) trades at 21. 7x forward P/E versus 55. 4x for Powell Industries, Inc. — 33. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for EMR: 14. 8% to $161. 92.
08Which pays a better dividend — HUBB or POWL or ETN or ROK or EMR?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Emerson Electric Co. (EMR) offers the highest yield at 1. 5%, versus 0. 1% for Powell Industries, Inc. (POWL).
09Is HUBB or POWL or ETN or ROK or EMR better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Eaton Corporation plc (ETN) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (1.
0% yield, +608. 7% 10Y return). Powell Industries, Inc. (POWL) carries a higher beta of 1. 95 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ETN: +608. 7%, POWL: +26. 5%), 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 HUBB and POWL and ETN and ROK and EMR?
Both stocks operate in the Industrials sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
HUBB, ETN, ROK, EMR pay a dividend while POWL 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.