SANM vs CLS

For growth investors, Celestica Inc.

(CLS) is the stronger pick with 30. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 7. 4% for Sanmina Corporation (SANM). Sanmina Corporation (SANM) offers the better valuation at 53. 5x trailing P/E (21. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Celestica Inc. (CLS) a "Buy" — based on 27 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, Sanmina Corporation (SANM) is the cheapest at 53.

5x versus Celestica Inc. at 56. 8x. On forward P/E, Sanmina Corporation is actually cheaper at 21. 4x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Celestica Inc. wins at 0. 56x versus Sanmina Corporation's 1. 20x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Celestica Inc.

(CLS) delivered a total return of +49. 7%, compared to +472. 9% for Sanmina Corporation (SANM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CLS returned +39. 7% versus SANM's +883. 7%. 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), Sanmina Corporation (SANM) is the lower-risk stock at 1.

92β versus Celestica Inc. 's 2. 75β — meaning CLS is approximately 43% more volatile than SANM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Sanmina Corporation (SANM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 16% versus 41% for Celestica Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Celestica Inc.

(CLS) is pulling ahead at 30. 7% versus 7. 4% for Sanmina Corporation (SANM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Celestica Inc. grew EPS 101. 9% year-over-year, compared to 14. 1% for Sanmina Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, CLS leads at 20. 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.

Celestica Inc.

(CLS) is the more profitable company, earning 6. 7% net margin versus 3. 0% for Sanmina Corporation — meaning it keeps 6. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CLS leads at 8. 6% versus 4. 4% for SANM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CLS leads at 11. 7%, 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.

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, Celestica Inc. (CLS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 56x versus Sanmina Corporation's 1. 20x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Sanmina Corporation (SANM) trades at 21. 4x forward P/E versus 41. 2x for Celestica Inc. — 19. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CLS: 10. 9% to $459. 00.

None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.

All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Sanmina Corporation (SANM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (+883.

7% 10Y return). Celestica Inc. (CLS) carries a higher beta of 2. 75 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (SANM: +883. 7%, CLS: +39. 7%), 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.

In terms of investment character: SANM is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; CLS is a mid-cap high-growth stock. 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.