Steel
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
LUD vs LIN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Chemicals - Specialty
LUD vs LIN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Steel | Chemicals - Specialty |
| Market Cap | $116M | $228.85B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $45M | $34.66B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-361K | $7.13B |
| Gross Margin | 25.4% | 46.0% |
| Operating Margin | 1.0% | 28.8% |
| Forward P/E | — | 27.7x |
| Total Debt | $614K | $26.99B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $8M | $5.06B |
LUD vs LIN — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Feb 25 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Luda Technology Gro… (LUD) | 100 | 142.9 | +42.9% |
| Linde plc (LIN) | 100 | 105.7 | +5.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LUD vs LIN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LUD carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 3 yrs, beta 0.01, yield 2.6%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.01, Low D/E 4.9%, current ratio 1.23x
- Beta 0.01, yield 2.6%, current ratio 1.23x
LIN is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 3.0%, EPS growth 7.1%, 3Y rev CAGR 0.6%
- 375.2% 10Y total return vs LUD's 45.0%
- 3.0% revenue growth vs LUD's -12.8%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 3.0% revenue growth vs LUD's -12.8% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 20.6% margin vs LUD's -0.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.01 vs LIN's 0.24, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.6% yield, 3-year raise streak, vs LIN's 1.2% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +45.0% vs LIN's +11.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 8.3% ROA vs LUD's -0.8%, ROIC 11.3% vs 4.6% |
LUD vs LIN — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
LUD vs LIN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LIN leads this category, winning 4 of 4 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LIN is the larger business by revenue, generating $34.7B annually — 772.5x LUD's $45M. LIN is the more profitable business, keeping 20.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to LUD's -0.8%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $45M | $34.7B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | — | $12.1B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | — | $7.1B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | — | $5.1B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +25.4% | +46.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +1.0% | +28.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -0.8% | +20.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +9.8% | +14.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +8.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +13.4% |
Valuation Metrics
LUD leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, LIN's 19.7x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than LUD's 115.8x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $116M | $228.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $108M | $250.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -362.50x | 33.85x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 27.67x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.33x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 115.84x | 19.75x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.59x | 6.73x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 10.31x | 5.82x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 26.49x | 44.97x |
Profitability & Efficiency
LIN leads this category, winning 5 of 8 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LIN delivers a 17.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $18 in annual profit, vs $-2 for LUD. LUD carries lower financial leverage with a 0.05x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to LIN's 0.68x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -2.5% | +17.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -0.8% | +8.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +4.6% | +11.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +2.9% | +13.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.05x | 0.68x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$8M | $21.9B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $8M | $5.1B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $614,476 | $27.0B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.82x | 34.52x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — LUD and LIN each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in LIN five years ago would be worth $17,394 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $14,500 for LUD. Over the past 12 months, LUD leads with a +45.0% total return vs LIN's +11.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors LUD at 13.2% vs LIN's 11.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -27.3% | +15.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +45.0% | +11.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +45.0% | +39.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +45.0% | +73.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +45.0% | +375.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +13.2% | +11.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — LUD and LIN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
LUD is the less volatile stock with a 0.01 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LIN's 0.24 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. LIN currently trades 94.7% from its 52-week high vs LUD's 24.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.01x | 0.24x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $24.20 | $521.28 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $2.90 | $387.78 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +24.0% | +94.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 54.7 | 51.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 126K | 2.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — LUD and LIN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
For income investors, LUD offers the higher dividend yield at 2.59% vs LIN's 1.21%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $539.71 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 28 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.6% | +1.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 3 | 6 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.15 | $6.00 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +2.0% |
LIN leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). LUD leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 3 tied.
LUD vs LIN: Frequently Asked Questions
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LUD or LIN a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Linde plc (LIN) is the stronger pick with 3.
0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -12. 8% for Luda Technology Group Limited (LUD). Linde plc (LIN) offers the better valuation at 33. 8x trailing P/E (27. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Linde plc (LIN) a "Buy" — based on 28 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 is the better long-term investment — LUD or LIN?
Over the past 5 years, Linde plc (LIN) delivered a total return of +73.
9%, compared to +45. 0% for Luda Technology Group Limited (LUD). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LIN returned +375. 2% versus LUD's +45. 0%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — LUD or LIN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Luda Technology Group Limited (LUD) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
01β versus Linde plc's 0. 24β — meaning LIN is approximately 1641% more volatile than LUD relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Luda Technology Group Limited (LUD) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 5% versus 68% for Linde plc — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — LUD or LIN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Linde plc (LIN) is pulling ahead at 3.
0% versus -12. 8% for Luda Technology Group Limited (LUD). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Linde plc grew EPS 7. 1% year-over-year, compared to -112. 3% for Luda Technology Group Limited. Over a 3-year CAGR, LUD leads at 9. 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.
05Which has better profit margins — LUD or LIN?
Linde plc (LIN) is the more profitable company, earning 20.
3% net margin versus -0. 8% for Luda Technology Group Limited — meaning it keeps 20. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LIN leads at 26. 3% versus 1. 0% for LUD. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — LIN leads at 43. 3%, 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.
06Which pays a better dividend — LUD or LIN?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Luda Technology Group Limited (LUD) offers the highest yield at 2. 6%, versus 1. 2% for Linde plc (LIN).
07Is LUD or LIN better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Linde plc (LIN) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
24), 1. 2% yield, +375. 2% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (LIN: +375. 2%, LUD: +45. 0%), 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.
08What are the main differences between LUD and LIN?
Both stocks operate in the Basic Materials 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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.