HUBB vs ROK vs EMR vs ETN

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 Emerson Electric Co. (EMR) a "Buy" — based on 41 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, Hubbell Incorporated (HUBB) is the cheapest at 29.

8x versus Rockwell Automation, Inc. at 58. 5x. 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: Hubbell Incorporated wins at 1. 20x versus Emerson Electric Co. 's 4. 81x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.

Over the past 5 years, Eaton Corporation plc (ETN) delivered a total return of +182.

8%, compared to +59. 5% for Emerson Electric Co. (EMR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ETN returned +608. 7% 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.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Rockwell Automation, Inc.

(ROK) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 33β versus Emerson Electric Co. 's 1. 52β — meaning EMR is approximately 15% more volatile than ROK relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Eaton Corporation plc (ETN) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 57% versus 98% for Rockwell Automation, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

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: Emerson Electric Co. grew EPS 17. 8% year-over-year, compared to -7. 4% for Rockwell Automation, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ETN leads at 9. 8% 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.

Hubbell Incorporated (HUBB) is the more profitable company, earning 15.

2% net margin versus 10. 4% for Rockwell Automation, Inc. — meaning it keeps 15. 2% 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.

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, Hubbell Incorporated (HUBB) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 20x versus Emerson Electric Co. 's 4. 81x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Emerson Electric Co. (EMR) trades at 21. 7x forward P/E versus 36. 9x for Rockwell Automation, Inc. — 15. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for EMR: 14. 8% to $161. 92.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Emerson Electric Co. (EMR) offers the highest yield at 1. 5%, versus 1. 0% for Eaton Corporation plc (ETN).

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). Emerson Electric Co. (EMR) carries a higher beta of 1. 52 — 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%, EMR: +206. 6%), 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.