Manufacturing - Tools & Accessories
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
RBC vs ITT vs GTLS vs MIDD vs ESAB
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Industrial - Machinery
Industrial - Machinery
Industrial - Machinery
Manufacturing - Metal Fabrication
RBC vs ITT vs GTLS vs MIDD vs ESAB — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Manufacturing - Tools & Accessories | Industrial - Machinery | Industrial - Machinery | Industrial - Machinery | Manufacturing - Metal Fabrication |
| Market Cap | $19.82B | $18.43B | $9.93B | $7.68B | $6.15B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.79B | $4.24B | $4.26B | $3.73B | $2.91B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $269M | $458M | $40M | $-278M | $207M |
| Gross Margin | 44.3% | 35.5% | 32.6% | 37.9% | 35.4% |
| Operating Margin | 23.8% | 15.9% | 8.5% | -2.5% | 16.2% |
| Forward P/E | 49.8x | 26.8x | 16.4x | 17.7x | 17.5x |
| Total Debt | $1.03B | $927M | $3.74B | $2.17B | $1.43B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $37M | $1.74B | $366M | $222M | $186M |
RBC vs ITT vs GTLS vs MIDD vs ESAB — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Mar 22 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| RBC Bearings Incorp… (RBC) | 100 | 312.6 | +212.6% |
| ITT Inc. (ITT) | 100 | 274.1 | +174.1% |
| Chart Industries, I… (GTLS) | 100 | 120.8 | +20.8% |
| The Middleby Corpor… (MIDD) | 100 | 100.4 | +0.4% |
| ESAB Corporation (ESAB) | 100 | 201.9 | +101.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: RBC vs ITT vs GTLS vs MIDD vs ESAB
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
RBC is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 4.9%, EPS growth 20.3%, 3Y rev CAGR 20.2%
- 8.6% 10Y total return vs ITT's 5.3%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.04, Low D/E 33.9%, current ratio 3.26x
- 15.0% margin vs MIDD's -7.4%
ITT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and valuation efficiency.
- Dividend streak 13 yrs, beta 1.23, yield 0.7%
- PEG 0.55 vs RBC's 5.68
- Beta 1.23, yield 0.7%, current ratio 2.58x
- 8.5% revenue growth vs MIDD's -17.4%
GTLS ranks third and is worth considering specifically for stability.
- Beta 0.49 vs ESAB's 1.24
MIDD lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
Among these 5 stocks, ESAB doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 8.5% revenue growth vs MIDD's -17.4% | |
| Value | PEG 0.55 vs 2.41 | |
| Quality / Margins | 15.0% margin vs MIDD's -7.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.49 vs ESAB's 1.24 | |
| Dividends | 0.7% yield, 13-year raise streak, vs RBC's 0.1%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +73.5% vs ESAB's -19.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 6.7% ROA vs MIDD's -4.1%, ROIC 16.1% vs 8.7% |
RBC vs ITT vs GTLS vs MIDD vs ESAB — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
RBC vs ITT vs GTLS vs MIDD vs ESAB — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
RBC leads in 2 of 6 categories
ITT leads 2 • ESAB leads 1 • GTLS leads 1 • MIDD leads 0
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
RBC leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
GTLS is the larger business by revenue, generating $4.3B annually — 2.4x RBC's $1.8B. RBC is the more profitable business, keeping 15.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to MIDD's -7.4%. On growth, ITT holds the edge at +32.7% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.8B | $4.2B | $4.3B | $3.7B | $2.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $548M | $781M | $644M | $26M | $539M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $269M | $458M | $40M | -$278M | $207M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $330M | $485M | $203M | $559M | $218M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +44.3% | +35.5% | +32.6% | +37.9% | +35.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +23.8% | +15.9% | +8.5% | -2.5% | +16.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +15.0% | +10.8% | +0.9% | -7.4% | +7.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +18.4% | +11.4% | +4.8% | +15.0% | +7.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +17.0% | +32.7% | -2.5% | -14.5% | +9.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +17.0% | -33.1% | -36.1% | -64.3% | -29.1% |
Valuation Metrics
ESAB leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 27.1x trailing earnings, ESAB trades at a 96% valuation discount to GTLS's 628.6x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), ITT offers better value at 0.69x vs RBC's 8.98x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $19.8B | $18.4B | $9.9B | $7.7B | $6.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $20.8B | $17.6B | $13.3B | $9.6B | $7.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 78.70x | 33.74x | 628.58x | -30.61x | 27.13x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 49.78x | 26.81x | 16.40x | 17.67x | 17.47x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 8.98x | 0.69x | — | — | 3.74x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 42.48x | 21.28x | 14.33x | 14.00x | 12.84x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 12.11x | 4.68x | 2.33x | 2.40x | 2.16x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 6.07x | 4.03x | 2.79x | 3.06x | 2.78x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 81.28x | 33.66x | 48.96x | 13.75x | 28.81x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ITT leads this category, winning 9 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ITT delivers a 13.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $13 in annual profit, vs $-9 for MIDD. ITT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.23x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to GTLS's 1.11x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), RBC scores 7/9 vs ESAB's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +8.2% | +13.0% | +1.2% | -8.5% | +9.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +5.2% | +6.7% | +0.4% | -4.1% | +4.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +6.9% | +16.1% | +7.4% | +8.7% | +11.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +8.5% | +16.3% | +8.6% | +10.1% | +13.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 7 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.34x | 0.23x | 1.11x | 0.78x | 0.65x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $992M | -$816M | $3.4B | $2.0B | $1.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $37M | $1.7B | $366M | $222M | $186M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.0B | $927M | $3.7B | $2.2B | $1.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 7.78x | 8.60x | 1.08x | -1.20x | 3.40x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
RBC leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in RBC five years ago would be worth $40,986 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8,993 for MIDD. Over the past 12 months, RBC leads with a +73.5% total return vs ESAB's -19.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors RBC at 39.4% vs MIDD's 4.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +32.1% | +18.6% | +0.6% | +9.2% | -10.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +73.5% | +44.7% | +31.8% | +18.0% | -19.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +171.0% | +150.7% | +62.7% | +13.0% | +73.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +309.9% | +112.6% | +40.6% | -10.1% | +104.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +858.0% | +527.0% | +772.7% | +52.0% | +104.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +39.4% | +35.9% | +17.6% | +4.1% | +20.1% |
Risk & Volatility
GTLS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
GTLS is the less volatile stock with a 0.49 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ESAB's 1.24 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. GTLS currently trades 99.5% from its 52-week high vs ESAB's 73.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.04x | 1.23x | 0.49x | 1.18x | 1.24x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $632.00 | $225.26 | $208.51 | $169.44 | $137.42 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $344.45 | $141.92 | $140.50 | $110.82 | $89.41 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +95.9% | +91.5% | +99.5% | +97.2% | +73.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 60.2 | 47.5 | 43.8 | 69.6 | 52.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 175K | 876K | 1.6M | 568K | 616K |
Analyst Outlook
ITT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: RBC as "Buy", ITT as "Buy", GTLS as "Buy", MIDD as "Buy", ESAB as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 39.7% upside for ESAB (target: $141) vs -6.6% for GTLS (target: $194). For income investors, ITT offers the higher dividend yield at 0.67% vs GTLS's 0.29%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $572.60 | $241.67 | $193.81 | $192.50 | $141.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 26 | 22 | 37 | 20 | 10 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.1% | +0.7% | +0.3% | — | +0.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 13 | 1 | 3 | 4 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.57 | $1.39 | $0.60 | — | $0.36 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.0% | +2.8% | 0.0% | +9.4% | 0.0% |
RBC leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). ITT leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Analyst Outlook).
RBC vs ITT vs GTLS vs MIDD vs ESAB: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is RBC or ITT or GTLS or MIDD or ESAB a better buy right now?
For growth investors, ITT Inc.
(ITT) is the stronger pick with 8. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -17. 4% for The Middleby Corporation (MIDD). ESAB Corporation (ESAB) offers the better valuation at 27. 1x trailing P/E (17. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate RBC Bearings Incorporated (RBC) a "Buy" — based on 26 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 — RBC or ITT or GTLS or MIDD or ESAB?
On trailing P/E, ESAB Corporation (ESAB) is the cheapest at 27.
1x versus Chart Industries, Inc. at 628. 6x. On forward P/E, Chart Industries, Inc. is actually cheaper at 16. 4x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: ITT Inc. wins at 0. 55x versus RBC Bearings Incorporated's 5. 68x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — RBC or ITT or GTLS or MIDD or ESAB?
Over the past 5 years, RBC Bearings Incorporated (RBC) delivered a total return of +309.
9%, compared to -10. 1% for The Middleby Corporation (MIDD). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: RBC returned +858. 0% versus MIDD's +52. 0%. 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 — RBC or ITT or GTLS or MIDD or ESAB?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Chart Industries, Inc.
(GTLS) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 49β versus ESAB Corporation's 1. 24β — meaning ESAB is approximately 151% more volatile than GTLS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, ITT Inc. (ITT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 23% versus 111% for Chart Industries, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — RBC or ITT or GTLS or MIDD or ESAB?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), ITT Inc.
(ITT) is pulling ahead at 8. 5% versus -17. 4% for The Middleby Corporation (MIDD). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: RBC Bearings Incorporated grew EPS 20. 3% year-over-year, compared to -168. 1% for The Middleby Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, GTLS leads at 38. 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 — RBC or ITT or GTLS or MIDD or ESAB?
RBC Bearings Incorporated (RBC) is the more profitable company, earning 15.
0% net margin versus -8. 7% for The Middleby Corporation — meaning it keeps 15. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: RBC leads at 22. 6% versus 15. 2% for GTLS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — RBC leads at 44. 4%, 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 RBC or ITT or GTLS or MIDD or ESAB 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, ITT Inc. (ITT) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 55x versus RBC Bearings Incorporated's 5. 68x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Chart Industries, Inc. (GTLS) trades at 16. 4x forward P/E versus 49. 8x for RBC Bearings Incorporated — 33. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ESAB: 39. 7% to $141. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — RBC or ITT or GTLS or MIDD or ESAB?
In this comparison, ITT (0.
7% yield), ESAB (0. 4% yield), GTLS (0. 3% yield) pay a dividend. RBC, MIDD do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is RBC or ITT or GTLS or MIDD or ESAB better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Chart Industries, Inc.
(GTLS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 49), +772. 7% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (GTLS: +772. 7%, ESAB: +104. 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 RBC and ITT and GTLS and MIDD and ESAB?
Both stocks operate in the Industrials sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
ITT pays a dividend while RBC, GTLS, MIDD, ESAB 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.