Semiconductors
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
ICHR vs CAMT vs MKSI vs ONTO vs UCTT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Semiconductors
Hardware, Equipment & Parts
Semiconductors
Semiconductors
ICHR vs CAMT vs MKSI vs ONTO vs UCTT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Semiconductors | Semiconductors | Hardware, Equipment & Parts | Semiconductors | Semiconductors |
| Market Cap | $2.47B | $7.18B | $20.25B | $13.63B | $3.63B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $959M | $472M | $4.07B | $1.03B | $2.07B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-51M | $134M | $327M | $106M | $-194M |
| Gross Margin | 11.3% | 50.3% | 45.2% | 48.8% | 15.6% |
| Operating Margin | -3.8% | 26.6% | 14.8% | 10.0% | -5.3% |
| Forward P/E | 62.2x | 55.5x | 30.4x | 38.7x | 34.4x |
| Total Debt | $186M | $207M | $4.69B | $17M | $810M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $98M | $126M | $675M | $346M | $312M |
ICHR vs CAMT vs MKSI vs ONTO vs UCTT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ichor Holdings, Ltd. (ICHR) | 100 | 313.1 | +213.1% |
| Camtek Ltd. (CAMT) | 100 | 1497.9 | +1397.9% |
| MKS Inc. (MKSI) | 100 | 284.8 | +184.8% |
| Onto Innovation Inc. (ONTO) | 100 | 881.7 | +781.7% |
| Ultra Clean Holding… (UCTT) | 100 | 385.4 | +285.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ICHR vs CAMT vs MKSI vs ONTO vs UCTT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ICHR is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if momentum is your priority.
- +329.1% vs ONTO's +118.9%
CAMT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 1.99, yield 0.6%
- Rev growth 36.1%, EPS growth 50.3%, 3Y rev CAGR 16.8%
- 106.7% 10Y total return vs ONTO's 14.3%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.99, Low D/E 37.7%, current ratio 5.00x
MKSI ranks third and is worth considering specifically for value.
- Lower P/E (30.4x vs 34.4x)
ONTO is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 1.12 vs CAMT's 1.59
Among these 5 stocks, UCTT doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 36.1% revenue growth vs UCTT's -2.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (30.4x vs 34.4x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 28.4% margin vs UCTT's -9.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.99 vs ICHR's 3.93 | |
| Dividends | 0.6% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs MKSI's 0.3%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +329.1% vs ONTO's +118.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.7% ROA vs UCTT's -11.0%, ROIC 13.7% vs 2.6% |
ICHR vs CAMT vs MKSI vs ONTO vs UCTT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
ICHR vs CAMT vs MKSI vs ONTO vs UCTT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CAMT leads in 4 of 6 categories
MKSI leads 1 • ICHR leads 0 • ONTO leads 0 • UCTT leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CAMT leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MKSI is the larger business by revenue, generating $4.1B annually — 8.6x CAMT's $472M. CAMT is the more profitable business, keeping 28.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to UCTT's -9.4%. On growth, CAMT holds the edge at +20.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $959M | $472M | $4.1B | $1.0B | $2.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$11M | $161M | $945M | $158M | -$52M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$51M | $134M | $327M | $106M | -$194M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$17M | $0 | $401M | $239M | -$44M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +11.3% | +50.3% | +45.2% | +48.8% | +15.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -3.8% | +26.6% | +14.8% | +10.0% | -5.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -5.3% | +28.4% | +8.0% | +10.3% | -9.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -1.7% | +26.1% | +9.8% | +23.2% | -2.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +4.7% | +20.2% | +15.2% | +9.5% | +2.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +46.2% | +21.1% | +53.2% | -48.5% | -2.6% |
Valuation Metrics
MKSI leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 68.8x trailing earnings, MKSI trades at a 30% valuation discount to ONTO's 98.6x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), CAMT offers better value at 2.28x vs ONTO's 2.85x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.5B | $7.2B | $20.2B | $13.6B | $3.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.6B | $7.3B | $24.3B | $13.3B | $4.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -46.25x | 79.79x | 68.83x | 98.57x | -19.98x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 62.25x | 55.49x | 30.36x | 38.74x | 34.44x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.28x | — | 2.85x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 26.70x | 68.79x | 34.53x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.61x | — | 5.15x | 13.56x | 1.77x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 3.67x | 17.36x | 7.49x | 6.43x | 4.62x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 40.74x | 45.47x | 247.26x |
Profitability & Efficiency
CAMT leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CAMT delivers a 21.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $21 in annual profit, vs $-25 for UCTT. ONTO carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MKSI's 1.73x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CAMT scores 7/9 vs ICHR's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -7.5% | +21.4% | +12.2% | +5.2% | -25.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -5.2% | +13.7% | +3.7% | +4.7% | -11.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -3.9% | +13.7% | +6.5% | +5.7% | +2.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -4.7% | +14.8% | +7.2% | +6.5% | +2.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 7 | 6 | 4 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.28x | 0.38x | 1.73x | 0.01x | 1.03x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $87M | $81M | $4.0B | -$329M | $499M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $98M | $126M | $675M | $346M | $312M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $186M | $207M | $4.7B | $17M | $810M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -5.97x | 4356.62x | 2.84x | — | -5.80x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CAMT leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CAMT five years ago would be worth $62,673 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $12,895 for ICHR. Over the past 12 months, ICHR leads with a +329.1% total return vs ONTO's +118.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CAMT at 91.6% vs ICHR's 35.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +249.0% | +67.2% | +78.8% | +65.2% | +192.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +329.1% | +177.5% | +306.1% | +118.9% | +312.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +151.1% | +603.4% | +266.0% | +218.0% | +187.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +28.9% | +526.7% | +66.5% | +312.6% | +59.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +629.1% | +10665.7% | +750.6% | +1431.7% | +1385.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +35.9% | +91.6% | +54.1% | +47.1% | +42.2% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ICHR and CAMT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CAMT is the less volatile stock with a 1.99 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ICHR's 3.93 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ICHR currently trades 97.7% from its 52-week high vs ONTO's 86.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 3.93x | 1.99x | 2.64x | 2.66x | 3.19x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $72.87 | $210.20 | $326.83 | $315.86 | $87.68 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $13.12 | $62.88 | $71.49 | $85.88 | $18.52 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +97.7% | +91.9% | +92.0% | +86.8% | +91.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 66.9 | 63.0 | 65.3 | 61.0 | 62.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 795K | 401K | 1.2M | 832K | 1.3M |
Analyst Outlook
CAMT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ICHR as "Buy", CAMT as "Buy", MKSI as "Buy", ONTO as "Buy", UCTT as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 12.5% upside for ONTO (target: $308) vs -30.1% for ICHR (target: $50). For income investors, CAMT offers the higher dividend yield at 0.63% vs MKSI's 0.29%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $49.80 | $165.60 | $272.86 | $308.33 | $85.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 14 | 13 | 29 | 11 | 12 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.6% | +0.3% | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 2 | 0 | — | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $1.22 | $0.87 | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | — | +0.2% | +0.6% | +0.1% |
CAMT leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). MKSI leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
ICHR vs CAMT vs MKSI vs ONTO vs UCTT: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ICHR or CAMT or MKSI or ONTO or UCTT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Camtek Ltd.
(CAMT) is the stronger pick with 36. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -2. 1% for Ultra Clean Holdings, Inc. (UCTT). MKS Inc. (MKSI) offers the better valuation at 68. 8x trailing P/E (30. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Ichor Holdings, Ltd. (ICHR) a "Buy" — based on 14 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 — ICHR or CAMT or MKSI or ONTO or UCTT?
On trailing P/E, MKS Inc.
(MKSI) is the cheapest at 68. 8x versus Onto Innovation Inc. at 98. 6x. On forward P/E, MKS Inc. is actually cheaper at 30. 4x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Onto Innovation Inc. wins at 1. 12x versus Camtek Ltd. 's 1. 59x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ICHR or CAMT or MKSI or ONTO or UCTT?
Over the past 5 years, Camtek Ltd.
(CAMT) delivered a total return of +526. 7%, compared to +28. 9% for Ichor Holdings, Ltd. (ICHR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CAMT returned +106. 7% versus ICHR's +629. 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 — ICHR or CAMT or MKSI or ONTO or UCTT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Camtek Ltd.
(CAMT) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 99β versus Ichor Holdings, Ltd. 's 3. 93β — meaning ICHR is approximately 97% more volatile than CAMT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Onto Innovation Inc. (ONTO) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 173% for MKS Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ICHR or CAMT or MKSI or ONTO or UCTT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Camtek Ltd.
(CAMT) is pulling ahead at 36. 1% versus -2. 1% for Ultra Clean Holdings, Inc. (UCTT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: MKS Inc. grew EPS 55. 5% year-over-year, compared to -869. 2% for Ultra Clean Holdings, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CAMT leads at 16. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — ICHR or CAMT or MKSI or ONTO or UCTT?
Camtek Ltd.
(CAMT) is the more profitable company, earning 27. 6% net margin versus -8. 8% for Ultra Clean Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 27. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CAMT leads at 25. 2% versus -4. 1% for ICHR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ONTO leads at 49. 7%, 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 ICHR or CAMT or MKSI or ONTO or UCTT 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, Onto Innovation Inc. (ONTO) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 12x versus Camtek Ltd. 's 1. 59x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, MKS Inc. (MKSI) trades at 30. 4x forward P/E versus 62. 2x for Ichor Holdings, Ltd. — 31. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ONTO: 12. 5% to $308. 33.
08Which pays a better dividend — ICHR or CAMT or MKSI or ONTO or UCTT?
In this comparison, CAMT (0.
6% yield), MKSI (0. 3% yield) pay a dividend. ICHR, ONTO, UCTT do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is ICHR or CAMT or MKSI or ONTO or UCTT better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Onto Innovation Inc.
(ONTO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (+1432% 10Y return). Ichor Holdings, Ltd. (ICHR) carries a higher beta of 3. 93 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ONTO: +1432%, ICHR: +629. 1%), 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 ICHR and CAMT and MKSI and ONTO and UCTT?
Both stocks operate in the Technology sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: ICHR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CAMT is a small-cap high-growth stock; MKSI is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; ONTO is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; UCTT is a small-cap quality compounder stock. CAMT pays a dividend while ICHR, MKSI, ONTO, UCTT 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.