Semiconductors
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
NVMI vs ONTO vs MKSI vs CAMT vs COHU
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Semiconductors
Hardware, Equipment & Parts
Semiconductors
Semiconductors
NVMI vs ONTO vs MKSI vs CAMT vs COHU — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Semiconductors | Semiconductors | Hardware, Equipment & Parts | Semiconductors | Semiconductors |
| Market Cap | $15.10B | $15.17B | $19.39B | $7.18B | $2.28B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $881M | $1.03B | $3.93B | $472M | $481M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $259M | $106M | $295M | $134M | $-56M |
| Gross Margin | 57.4% | 48.8% | 45.2% | 50.3% | 25.7% |
| Operating Margin | 28.8% | 10.0% | 13.7% | 26.6% | -10.6% |
| Forward P/E | 49.9x | 43.1x | 29.0x | 56.7x | 91.0x |
| Total Debt | $236M | $17M | $4.69B | $207M | $359M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $158M | $346M | $675M | $126M | $227M |
NVMI vs ONTO vs MKSI vs CAMT vs COHU — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nova Ltd. (NVMI) | 100 | 1081.5 | +981.5% |
| Onto Innovation Inc. (ONTO) | 100 | 981.3 | +881.3% |
| MKS Inc. (MKSI) | 100 | 272.3 | +172.3% |
| Camtek Ltd. (CAMT) | 100 | 1529.9 | +1429.9% |
| Cohu, Inc. (COHU) | 100 | 321.7 | +221.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NVMI vs ONTO vs MKSI vs CAMT vs COHU
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NVMI ranks third and is worth considering specifically for quality.
- 29.4% margin vs COHU's -11.5%
ONTO is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.33 vs CAMT's 1.62
MKSI is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if value and momentum is your priority.
- Lower P/E (29.0x vs 91.0x)
- +287.5% vs ONTO's +145.2%
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%
- 102.6% 10Y total return vs NVMI's 44.9%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.99, Low D/E 37.7%, current ratio 5.00x
Among these 5 stocks, COHU doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 36.1% revenue growth vs ONTO's 1.8% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (29.0x vs 91.0x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 29.4% margin vs COHU's -11.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.99 vs ONTO's 2.66 | |
| Dividends | 0.6% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs MKSI's 0.3%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +287.5% vs ONTO's +145.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.7% ROA vs COHU's -4.9%, ROIC 13.7% vs -5.7% |
NVMI vs ONTO vs MKSI vs CAMT vs COHU — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
NVMI vs ONTO vs MKSI vs CAMT vs COHU — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CAMT leads in 2 of 6 categories
NVMI leads 1 • MKSI leads 1 • ONTO leads 0 • COHU leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NVMI leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MKSI is the larger business by revenue, generating $3.9B annually — 8.3x CAMT's $472M. NVMI is the more profitable business, keeping 29.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to COHU's -11.5%. On growth, COHU holds the edge at +29.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $881M | $1.0B | $3.9B | $472M | $481M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $276M | $158M | $883M | $161M | -$11M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $259M | $106M | $295M | $134M | -$56M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $218M | $239M | $496M | $0 | $32M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +57.4% | +48.8% | +45.2% | +50.3% | +25.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +28.8% | +10.0% | +13.7% | +26.6% | -10.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +29.4% | +10.3% | +7.5% | +28.4% | -11.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +24.7% | +23.2% | +12.6% | +26.1% | +6.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +14.3% | +9.5% | +10.6% | +20.2% | +29.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +22.8% | -48.5% | +18.8% | +21.1% | +60.6% |
Valuation Metrics
MKSI leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 65.8x trailing earnings, MKSI trades at a 40% valuation discount to ONTO's 109.7x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), CAMT offers better value at 2.33x vs ONTO's 3.17x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $15.1B | $15.2B | $19.4B | $7.2B | $2.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $15.2B | $14.8B | $23.4B | $7.3B | $2.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 89.72x | 109.71x | 65.82x | 81.49x | -30.47x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 49.94x | 43.11x | 29.03x | 56.68x | 91.04x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 2.48x | 3.17x | — | 2.33x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 74.09x | 76.76x | 25.75x | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 22.46x | 15.09x | 4.93x | — | 5.03x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 17.87x | 7.15x | 7.16x | 17.73x | 2.88x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 69.27x | 50.61x | 39.01x | — | 212.08x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — NVMI and ONTO and CAMT each lead in 3 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 $-7 for COHU. 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), NVMI scores 8/9 vs COHU's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +19.7% | +5.2% | +10.8% | +21.4% | -6.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +11.0% | +4.7% | +3.4% | +13.7% | -4.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +14.9% | +5.7% | +6.5% | +13.7% | -5.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +20.7% | +6.5% | +7.2% | +14.8% | -5.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 4 | 6 | 7 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.25x | 0.01x | 1.73x | 0.38x | 0.46x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $78M | -$329M | $4.0B | $81M | $132M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $158M | $346M | $675M | $126M | $227M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $236M | $17M | $4.7B | $207M | $359M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 116.20x | — | 2.55x | 4356.62x | -168.82x |
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 $63,025 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $12,923 for COHU. Over the past 12 months, MKSI leads with a +287.5% total return vs ONTO's +145.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CAMT at 94.7% vs COHU's 12.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +48.5% | +83.9% | +71.0% | +70.7% | +96.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +163.1% | +145.2% | +287.5% | +194.5% | +195.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +455.5% | +253.3% | +228.0% | +638.6% | +40.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +475.2% | +377.9% | +65.5% | +530.3% | +29.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +4485.5% | +1623.2% | +724.4% | +10263.5% | +339.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +77.1% | +52.3% | +48.6% | +94.7% | +12.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CAMT and COHU 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 ONTO's 2.66 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. COHU currently trades 98.0% from its 52-week high vs CAMT's 93.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.37x | 2.66x | 2.64x | 1.99x | 2.13x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $548.91 | $315.86 | $298.00 | $210.20 | $49.45 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $176.52 | $85.88 | $71.49 | $62.88 | $15.34 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +94.0% | +96.6% | +96.5% | +93.8% | +98.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 49.0 | 65.8 | 65.6 | 52.5 | 70.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 334K | 814K | 1.1M | 420K | 927K |
Analyst Outlook
CAMT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NVMI as "Buy", ONTO as "Buy", MKSI as "Buy", CAMT as "Buy", COHU as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 2.7% upside for COHU (target: $50) vs -16.0% for CAMT (target: $166). For income investors, CAMT offers the higher dividend yield at 0.62% vs MKSI's 0.30%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $489.50 | $308.33 | $272.86 | $165.60 | $49.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 12 | 11 | 29 | 13 | 14 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +0.3% | +0.6% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $0.87 | $1.22 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.2% | +0.5% | +0.2% | — | +0.3% |
CAMT leads in 2 of 6 categories (Total Returns, Analyst Outlook). NVMI leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 2 tied.
NVMI vs ONTO vs MKSI vs CAMT vs COHU: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NVMI or ONTO or MKSI or CAMT or COHU a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Camtek Ltd.
(CAMT) is the stronger pick with 36. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 8% for Onto Innovation Inc. (ONTO). MKS Inc. (MKSI) offers the better valuation at 65. 8x trailing P/E (29. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Nova Ltd. (NVMI) a "Buy" — based on 12 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 — NVMI or ONTO or MKSI or CAMT or COHU?
On trailing P/E, MKS Inc.
(MKSI) is the cheapest at 65. 8x versus Onto Innovation Inc. at 109. 7x. On forward P/E, MKS Inc. is actually cheaper at 29. 0x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Onto Innovation Inc. wins at 0. 33x versus Camtek Ltd. 's 1. 62x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — NVMI or ONTO or MKSI or CAMT or COHU?
Over the past 5 years, Camtek Ltd.
(CAMT) delivered a total return of +530. 3%, compared to +29. 2% for Cohu, Inc. (COHU). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CAMT returned +102. 6% versus COHU's +339. 2%. 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 — NVMI or ONTO or MKSI or CAMT or COHU?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Camtek Ltd.
(CAMT) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 99β versus Onto Innovation Inc. 's 2. 66β — meaning ONTO is approximately 33% 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 — NVMI or ONTO or MKSI or CAMT or COHU?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Camtek Ltd.
(CAMT) is pulling ahead at 36. 1% versus 1. 8% for Onto Innovation Inc. (ONTO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: MKS Inc. grew EPS 55. 5% year-over-year, compared to -31. 5% for Onto Innovation Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, NVMI leads at 17. 3% 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 — NVMI or ONTO or MKSI or CAMT or COHU?
Camtek Ltd.
(CAMT) is the more profitable company, earning 27. 6% net margin versus -16. 4% for Cohu, Inc. — meaning it keeps 27. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NVMI leads at 27. 9% versus -13. 3% for COHU. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NVMI leads at 57. 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 NVMI or ONTO or MKSI or CAMT or COHU 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 0. 33x versus Camtek Ltd. 's 1. 62x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, MKS Inc. (MKSI) trades at 29. 0x forward P/E versus 91. 0x for Cohu, Inc. — 62. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for COHU: 2. 7% to $49. 75.
08Which pays a better dividend — NVMI or ONTO or MKSI or CAMT or COHU?
In this comparison, CAMT (0.
6% yield), MKSI (0. 3% yield) pay a dividend. NVMI, ONTO, COHU do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is NVMI or ONTO or MKSI or CAMT or COHU 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 (+1623% 10Y return). Nova Ltd. (NVMI) carries a higher beta of 2. 37 — 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: +1623%, NVMI: +44. 9%), 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 NVMI and ONTO and MKSI and CAMT and COHU?
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: NVMI is a mid-cap high-growth stock; ONTO is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; MKSI is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; CAMT is a small-cap high-growth stock; COHU is a small-cap quality compounder stock. CAMT pays a dividend while NVMI, ONTO, MKSI, COHU 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.