Engineering & Construction
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
IESC vs POWL vs HUBB vs MYRG vs ETN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Electrical Equipment & Parts
Electrical Equipment & Parts
Engineering & Construction
Industrial - Machinery
IESC vs POWL vs HUBB vs MYRG vs ETN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Engineering & Construction | Electrical Equipment & Parts | Electrical Equipment & Parts | Engineering & Construction | Industrial - Machinery |
| Market Cap | $13.26B | $11.14B | $26.21B | $6.65B | $155.02B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $3.49B | $1.13B | $6.00B | $3.82B | $28.52B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $341M | $187M | $906M | $142M | $3.99B |
| Gross Margin | 25.8% | 30.1% | 35.5% | 11.9% | 36.9% |
| Operating Margin | 11.6% | 19.8% | 20.8% | 5.1% | 18.1% |
| Forward P/E | 37.9x | 55.4x | 25.0x | 44.0x | 30.0x |
| Total Debt | $158M | $2M | $2.61B | $104M | $11.17B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $127M | $451M | $483M | $150M | $622M |
IESC vs POWL vs HUBB vs MYRG vs ETN — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| IES Holdings, Inc. (IESC) | 100 | 2849.1 | +2749.1% |
| Powell Industries, … (POWL) | 100 | 3488.0 | +3388.0% |
| Hubbell Incorporated (HUBB) | 100 | 402.4 | +302.4% |
| MYR Group Inc. (MYRG) | 100 | 1519.8 | +1419.8% |
| Eaton Corporation p… (ETN) | 100 | 472.9 | +372.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: IESC vs POWL vs HUBB vs MYRG vs ETN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
IESC carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 16.9%, EPS growth 51.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 15.9%
- 51.1% 10Y total return vs POWL's 26.5%
- PEG 0.76 vs MYRG's 2.64
- 16.9% revenue growth vs HUBB's 3.8%
POWL is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if quality and momentum is your priority.
- 16.5% margin vs MYRG's 3.7%
- +425.5% vs ETN's +33.2%
HUBB ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 12 yrs, beta 1.38, yield 1.1%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.38, Low D/E 67.6%, current ratio 1.72x
- Beta 1.38, yield 1.1%, current ratio 1.72x
- Beta 1.38 vs IESC's 2.73
MYRG lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
Among these 5 stocks, ETN doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 16.9% revenue growth vs HUBB's 3.8% | |
| Value | PEG 0.76 vs 1.22 | |
| Quality / Margins | 16.5% margin vs MYRG's 3.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.38 vs IESC's 2.73 | |
| Dividends | 1.1% yield, 12-year raise streak, vs ETN's 1.0%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +425.5% vs ETN's +33.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 22.4% ROA vs MYRG's 8.7%, ROIC 37.5% vs 18.3% |
IESC vs POWL vs HUBB vs MYRG vs ETN — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
IESC vs POWL vs HUBB vs MYRG vs ETN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
HUBB leads in 1 of 6 categories
POWL leads 1 • IESC leads 0 • MYRG leads 0 • ETN leads 0 • 4 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — MYRG and ETN each lead in 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. POWL is the more profitable business, keeping 16.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to MYRG's 3.7%. On growth, MYRG holds the edge at +20.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $3.5B | $1.1B | $6.0B | $3.8B | $28.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $425M | $232M | $1.5B | $261M | $5.9B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $341M | $187M | $906M | $142M | $4.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $224M | $143M | $909M | $231M | $4.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +25.8% | +30.1% | +35.5% | +11.9% | +36.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +11.6% | +19.8% | +20.8% | +5.1% | +18.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +9.8% | +16.5% | +15.1% | +3.7% | +14.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +6.4% | +12.6% | +15.2% | +6.0% | +16.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +16.2% | +6.5% | +11.1% | +20.0% | +16.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +65.8% | -0.8% | +8.3% | +106.2% | -9.4% |
Valuation Metrics
HUBB leads this category, winning 4 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), IESC offers better value at 0.88x vs MYRG's 3.40x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $13.3B | $11.1B | $26.2B | $6.7B | $155.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $13.3B | $10.7B | $28.3B | $6.6B | $165.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 44.32x | 61.76x | 29.81x | 56.76x | 38.17x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 37.91x | 55.38x | 25.01x | 44.03x | 30.00x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.88x | 1.03x | 1.43x | 3.40x | 1.55x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 30.89x | 47.51x | 20.81x | 28.84x | 27.69x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 3.93x | 10.09x | 4.48x | 1.82x | 5.65x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 15.13x | 17.43x | 6.85x | 10.18x | 7.99x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 60.61x | 72.00x | 29.97x | 28.66x | 34.67x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — IESC and POWL each lead in 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
IESC delivers a 39.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $40 in annual profit, vs $21 for ETN. POWL carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to HUBB's 0.68x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MYRG scores 8/9 vs POWL's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +39.9% | +28.6% | +24.4% | +22.1% | +20.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +22.4% | +16.9% | +11.6% | +8.7% | +9.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +37.5% | +90.6% | +17.1% | +18.3% | +13.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +45.6% | +37.5% | +20.1% | +19.4% | +16.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 5 | 7 | 8 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.18x | 0.00x | 0.68x | 0.16x | 0.57x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $30M | -$449M | $2.1B | -$47M | $10.5B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $127M | $451M | $483M | $150M | $622M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $158M | $2M | $2.6B | $104M | $11.2B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 269.44x | — | 16.90x | 39.49x | 16.38x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
POWL leads this category, winning 5 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 $25,941 for HUBB. Over the past 12 months, POWL leads with a +425.5% total return vs ETN's +33.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors POWL at 161.5% vs HUBB's 23.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +63.6% | +160.4% | +6.8% | +88.5% | +22.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +175.5% | +425.5% | +41.5% | +175.2% | +33.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +1415.6% | +1689.0% | +87.9% | +219.8% | +141.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +1182.0% | +2428.2% | +159.4% | +417.6% | +182.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +5112.5% | +2652.9% | +410.7% | +1680.8% | +608.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +147.5% | +161.5% | +23.4% | +47.3% | +34.1% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — IESC and HUBB each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
HUBB is the less volatile stock with a 1.38 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than IESC's 2.73 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. IESC 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 | 2.66x | 1.95x | 1.38x | 1.65x | 1.42x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $688.51 | $434.00 | $565.50 | $475.39 | $435.43 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $235.94 | $54.75 | $349.40 | $152.10 | $296.93 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +96.7% | +70.5% | +87.2% | +89.9% | +91.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 68.8 | 83.2 | 41.2 | 80.7 | 59.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 211K | 691K | 546K | 306K | 2.5M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — HUBB and ETN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: IESC as "Buy", POWL as "Hold", HUBB as "Hold", MYRG as "Hold", ETN as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 8.5% upside for HUBB (target: $535) vs -31.2% for IESC (target: $458). For income investors, HUBB offers the higher dividend yield at 1.09% vs POWL's 0.12%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $458.00 | $213.67 | $535.14 | $362.00 | $379.78 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 1 | 9 | 17 | 21 | 39 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.1% | +1.1% | — | +1.0% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 2 | 12 | 4 | 24 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.35 | $5.35 | — | $4.17 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.3% | +0.1% | +0.9% | +1.2% | +1.2% |
HUBB leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). POWL leads in 1 (Total Returns). 4 tied.
IESC vs POWL vs HUBB vs MYRG vs ETN: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is IESC or POWL or HUBB or MYRG or ETN a better buy right now?
For growth investors, IES Holdings, Inc.
(IESC) is the stronger pick with 16. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 8% for Hubbell Incorporated (HUBB). 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 IES Holdings, Inc. (IESC) a "Buy" — based on 1 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 — IESC or POWL or HUBB or MYRG or ETN?
On trailing P/E, Hubbell Incorporated (HUBB) is the cheapest at 29.
8x versus Powell Industries, Inc. at 61. 8x. On forward P/E, Hubbell Incorporated is actually cheaper at 25. 0x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: IES Holdings, Inc. wins at 0. 76x versus MYR Group Inc. 's 2. 64x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — IESC or POWL or HUBB or MYRG or ETN?
Over the past 5 years, Powell Industries, Inc.
(POWL) delivered a total return of +24. 3%, compared to +159. 4% for Hubbell Incorporated (HUBB). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IESC returned +51. 2% versus HUBB's +410. 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 — IESC or POWL or HUBB or MYRG or ETN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Hubbell Incorporated (HUBB) is the lower-risk stock at 1.
38β versus IES Holdings, Inc. 's 2. 66β — meaning IESC is approximately 93% more volatile than HUBB relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Powell Industries, Inc. (POWL) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 68% for Hubbell Incorporated — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — IESC or POWL or HUBB or MYRG or ETN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), IES Holdings, Inc.
(IESC) is pulling ahead at 16. 9% versus 3. 8% for Hubbell Incorporated (HUBB). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: MYR Group Inc. grew EPS 311. 5% year-over-year, compared to 10. 1% for Eaton Corporation plc. 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 — IESC or POWL or HUBB or MYRG or ETN?
Powell Industries, Inc.
(POWL) is the more profitable company, earning 16. 4% net margin versus 3. 2% for MYR Group 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 4. 4% for MYRG. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ETN leads at 37. 6%, 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 IESC or POWL or HUBB or MYRG or ETN 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, IES Holdings, Inc. (IESC) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 76x versus MYR Group Inc. 's 2. 64x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Hubbell Incorporated (HUBB) trades at 25. 0x forward P/E versus 55. 4x for Powell Industries, Inc. — 30. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for HUBB: 8. 5% to $535. 14.
08Which pays a better dividend — IESC or POWL or HUBB or MYRG or ETN?
In this comparison, HUBB (1.
1% yield), ETN (1. 0% yield), POWL (0. 1% yield) pay a dividend. IESC, MYRG do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is IESC or POWL or HUBB or MYRG or ETN 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). IES Holdings, Inc. (IESC) carries a higher beta of 2. 66 — 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%, IESC: +51. 2%), 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 IESC and POWL and HUBB and MYRG and ETN?
Both stocks operate in the Industrials sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: IESC is a mid-cap high-growth stock; POWL is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; HUBB is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; MYRG is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ETN is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. HUBB, ETN pay a dividend while IESC, POWL, MYRG 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.