Semiconductors
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
ICHR vs UCTT vs MKSI vs CAMT vs ONTO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Semiconductors
Hardware, Equipment & Parts
Semiconductors
Semiconductors
ICHR vs UCTT vs MKSI vs CAMT vs ONTO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Semiconductors | Semiconductors | Hardware, Equipment & Parts | Semiconductors | Semiconductors |
| Market Cap | $2.59B | $3.96B | $21.09B | $7.18B | $14.16B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $959M | $2.07B | $4.07B | $472M | $1.03B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-51M | $-194M | $327M | $134M | $106M |
| Gross Margin | 11.3% | 15.6% | 45.2% | 50.3% | 48.8% |
| Operating Margin | -3.8% | -5.3% | 14.8% | 26.6% | 10.0% |
| Forward P/E | 54.0x | 37.5x | 27.3x | 59.1x | 39.9x |
| Total Debt | $186M | $810M | $4.69B | $207M | $17M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $98M | $312M | $675M | $126M | $346M |
ICHR vs UCTT vs MKSI vs CAMT vs ONTO — 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 | 327.1 | +227.1% |
| Ultra Clean Holding… (UCTT) | 100 | 420.2 | +320.2% |
| MKS Inc. (MKSI) | 100 | 296.5 | +196.5% |
| Camtek Ltd. (CAMT) | 100 | 1594.6 | +1494.6% |
| Onto Innovation Inc. (ONTO) | 100 | 915.9 | +815.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ICHR vs UCTT vs MKSI vs CAMT vs ONTO
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.
- +345.1% vs ONTO's +124.5%
UCTT lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
MKSI ranks third and is worth considering specifically for value.
- Lower P/E (27.3x vs 59.1x)
CAMT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 2.06, yield 0.6%
- Rev growth 36.1%, EPS growth 50.3%, 3Y rev CAGR 16.8%
- 113.5% 10Y total return vs UCTT's 15.2%
- Lower volatility, beta 2.06, Low D/E 37.7%, current ratio 5.00x
ONTO is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 1.16 vs CAMT's 1.69
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 36.1% revenue growth vs UCTT's -2.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (27.3x vs 59.1x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 28.4% margin vs UCTT's -9.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 2.06 vs ICHR's 3.78 | |
| Dividends | 0.6% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs MKSI's 0.3%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +345.1% vs ONTO's +124.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.7% ROA vs UCTT's -11.0%, ROIC 13.7% vs 2.6% |
ICHR vs UCTT vs MKSI vs CAMT vs ONTO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
ICHR vs UCTT vs MKSI vs CAMT vs ONTO — 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 • UCTT leads 0 • ONTO 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 | $2.1B | $4.1B | $472M | $1.0B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$11M | -$52M | $945M | $161M | $158M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$51M | -$194M | $327M | $134M | $106M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$17M | -$44M | $401M | $0 | $239M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +11.3% | +15.6% | +45.2% | +50.3% | +48.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -3.8% | -5.3% | +14.8% | +26.6% | +10.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -5.3% | -9.4% | +8.0% | +28.4% | +10.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -1.7% | -2.1% | +9.8% | +26.1% | +23.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +4.7% | +2.9% | +15.2% | +20.2% | +9.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +46.2% | -2.6% | +53.2% | +21.1% | -48.5% |
Valuation Metrics
MKSI leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 71.7x trailing earnings, MKSI trades at a 30% valuation discount to ONTO's 102.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), CAMT offers better value at 2.43x vs ONTO's 2.96x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.6B | $4.0B | $21.1B | $7.2B | $14.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.7B | $4.5B | $25.1B | $7.3B | $13.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -48.32x | -21.77x | 71.67x | 84.93x | 102.40x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 53.98x | 37.54x | 27.27x | 59.07x | 39.93x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 2.43x | 2.96x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 37.27x | 27.62x | — | 71.53x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.73x | 1.93x | 5.36x | — | 14.09x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 3.84x | 5.03x | 7.80x | 18.48x | 6.68x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 269.54x | 42.43x | — | 47.23x |
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% | -25.4% | +12.2% | +21.4% | +5.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -5.2% | -11.0% | +3.7% | +13.7% | +4.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -3.9% | +2.6% | +6.5% | +13.7% | +5.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -4.7% | +2.9% | +7.2% | +14.8% | +6.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.28x | 1.03x | 1.73x | 0.38x | 0.01x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $87M | $499M | $4.0B | $81M | -$329M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $98M | $312M | $675M | $126M | $346M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $186M | $810M | $4.7B | $207M | $17M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -5.97x | -5.80x | 2.84x | 4356.62x | — |
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 $69,818 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $14,598 for ICHR. Over the past 12 months, ICHR leads with a +345.1% total return vs ONTO's +124.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CAMT at 95.6% vs ICHR's 37.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +264.6% | +218.8% | +86.2% | +78.0% | +71.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +345.1% | +332.5% | +306.4% | +198.0% | +124.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +162.3% | +213.4% | +281.0% | +648.4% | +230.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +46.0% | +84.0% | +82.1% | +598.2% | +360.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +661.7% | +1519.0% | +784.8% | +11354.2% | +1491.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +37.9% | +46.3% | +56.2% | +95.6% | +48.9% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — UCTT and CAMT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CAMT is the less volatile stock with a 2.06 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ICHR's 3.78 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. UCTT currently trades 99.3% from its 52-week high vs ONTO's 90.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 3.78x | 3.21x | 2.56x | 2.06x | 2.60x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $75.35 | $87.68 | $326.83 | $210.20 | $315.86 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $13.12 | $18.93 | $73.21 | $62.88 | $85.88 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +98.8% | +99.3% | +95.8% | +97.8% | +90.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 64.2 | 57.0 | 68.0 | 56.3 | 51.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 791K | 1.2M | 1.2M | 396K | 827K |
Analyst Outlook
CAMT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ICHR as "Buy", UCTT as "Buy", MKSI as "Buy", CAMT as "Buy", ONTO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 16.5% upside for ONTO (target: $332) vs -26.6% for ICHR (target: $55). For income investors, CAMT offers the higher dividend yield at 0.59% vs MKSI's 0.28%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $54.60 | $100.00 | $294.25 | $165.60 | $331.67 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 14 | 12 | 29 | 13 | 11 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +0.3% | +0.6% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $0.87 | $1.22 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.1% | +0.2% | — | +0.5% |
CAMT leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). MKSI leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
ICHR vs UCTT vs MKSI vs CAMT vs ONTO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ICHR or UCTT or MKSI or CAMT or ONTO 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 71. 7x trailing P/E (27. 3x 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 UCTT or MKSI or CAMT or ONTO?
On trailing P/E, MKS Inc.
(MKSI) is the cheapest at 71. 7x versus Onto Innovation Inc. at 102. 4x. On forward P/E, MKS Inc. is actually cheaper at 27. 3x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Onto Innovation Inc. wins at 1. 16x versus Camtek Ltd. 's 1. 69x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ICHR or UCTT or MKSI or CAMT or ONTO?
Over the past 5 years, Camtek Ltd.
(CAMT) delivered a total return of +598. 2%, compared to +46. 0% for Ichor Holdings, Ltd. (ICHR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CAMT returned +113. 5% versus ICHR's +661. 7%. 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 UCTT or MKSI or CAMT or ONTO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Camtek Ltd.
(CAMT) is the lower-risk stock at 2. 06β versus Ichor Holdings, Ltd. 's 3. 78β — meaning ICHR is approximately 83% 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 UCTT or MKSI or CAMT or ONTO?
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 UCTT or MKSI or CAMT or ONTO?
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 UCTT or MKSI or CAMT or ONTO 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. 16x versus Camtek Ltd. 's 1. 69x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, MKS Inc. (MKSI) trades at 27. 3x forward P/E versus 59. 1x for Camtek Ltd. — 31. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ONTO: 16. 5% to $331. 67.
08Which pays a better dividend — ICHR or UCTT or MKSI or CAMT or ONTO?
In this comparison, CAMT (0.
6% yield), MKSI (0. 3% yield) pay a dividend. ICHR, UCTT, ONTO do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is ICHR or UCTT or MKSI or CAMT or ONTO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Ultra Clean Holdings, Inc.
(UCTT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (+1519% 10Y return). Ichor Holdings, Ltd. (ICHR) carries a higher beta of 3. 78 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (UCTT: +1519%, ICHR: +661. 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.
10What are the main differences between ICHR and UCTT and MKSI and CAMT and ONTO?
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; UCTT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MKSI is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; CAMT is a small-cap high-growth stock; ONTO is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. CAMT pays a dividend while ICHR, UCTT, MKSI, ONTO 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.