MKSI vs ASML

For growth investors, ASML Holding N.

V. (ASML) is the stronger pick with 11. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 9. 6% for MKS Inc. (MKSI). ASML Holding N. V. (ASML) offers the better valuation at 52. 0x trailing P/E (44. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate MKS Inc. (MKSI) a "Buy" — based on 29 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, ASML Holding N.

V. (ASML) is the cheapest at 52. 0x versus MKS Inc. at 65. 8x. On forward P/E, MKS Inc. is actually cheaper at 29. 0x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, ASML Holding N.

V. (ASML) delivered a total return of +130. 2%, compared to +65. 5% for MKS Inc. (MKSI). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ASML returned +1502% versus MKSI's +724. 4%. 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), ASML Holding N.

V. (ASML) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 91β versus MKS Inc. 's 2. 64β — meaning MKSI is approximately 38% more volatile than ASML relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, ASML Holding N. V. (ASML) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 14% versus 173% for MKS Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), ASML Holding N.

V. (ASML) is pulling ahead at 11. 0% versus 9. 6% for MKS Inc. (MKSI). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: MKS Inc. grew EPS 55. 5% year-over-year, compared to 23. 3% for ASML Holding N. V.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ASML leads at 14. 0% 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.

ASML Holding N.

V. (ASML) is the more profitable company, earning 29. 4% net margin versus 7. 5% for MKS Inc. — meaning it keeps 29. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ASML leads at 34. 6% versus 14. 4% for MKSI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ASML 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.

On forward earnings alone, MKS Inc.

(MKSI) trades at 29. 0x forward P/E versus 44. 6x for ASML Holding N. V. — 15. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ASML: 10. 6% to $1595. 20.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

ASML Holding N. V. (ASML) offers the highest yield at 0. 5%, versus 0. 3% for MKS Inc. (MKSI).

For long-horizon retirement investors, ASML Holding N.

V. (ASML) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (0. 5% yield, +1502% 10Y return). MKS Inc. (MKSI) carries a higher beta of 2. 64 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ASML: +1502%, MKSI: +724. 4%), 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 Technology sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

ASML pays a dividend while MKSI does 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.