Personal Products & Services
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
SCI vs HI vs FELE vs CSV vs GTLS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Industrial - Machinery
Industrial - Machinery
Personal Products & Services
Industrial - Machinery
SCI vs HI vs FELE vs CSV vs GTLS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Personal Products & Services | Industrial - Machinery | Industrial - Machinery | Personal Products & Services | Industrial - Machinery |
| Market Cap | $10.88B | $2.26B | $4.46B | $739M | $9.94B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $4.33B | $2.52B | $2.18B | $416M | $4.26B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $626M | $35M | $150M | $44M | $40M |
| Gross Margin | 26.2% | 33.7% | 35.2% | 35.3% | 32.6% |
| Operating Margin | 22.4% | 6.1% | 12.6% | 22.2% | 8.5% |
| Forward P/E | 18.8x | 12.4x | 22.0x | 13.6x | 16.4x |
| Total Debt | $5.14B | $1.60B | $280M | $563M | $3.74B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $244M | $165M | $100M | $2M | $366M |
SCI vs HI vs FELE vs CSV vs GTLS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Service Corporation… (SCI) | 100 | 198.9 | +98.9% |
| Hillenbrand, Inc. (HI) | 100 | 124.0 | +24.0% |
| Franklin Electric C… (FELE) | 100 | 199.1 | +99.1% |
| Carriage Services, … (CSV) | 100 | 248.8 | +148.8% |
| Chart Industries, I… (GTLS) | 100 | 529.3 | +429.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SCI vs HI vs FELE vs CSV vs GTLS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
SCI has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 12 yrs, beta 0.11, yield 1.6%
- Beta 0.11, yield 1.6%, current ratio 0.55x
- 14.5% margin vs GTLS's 0.9%
- Beta 0.11 vs HI's 1.92
HI is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if dividends and momentum is your priority.
- 2.8% yield, 4-year raise streak, vs FELE's 1.1%
- +65.2% vs SCI's +3.8%
FELE ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth and efficiency.
- 5.4% revenue growth vs HI's -16.0%
- 7.6% ROA vs GTLS's 0.4%, ROIC 14.7% vs 7.4%
CSV is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and valuation efficiency.
- Rev growth 3.3%, EPS growth 54.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 4.1%
- PEG 0.46 vs SCI's 3.29
- Lower P/E (13.6x vs 16.4x)
GTLS is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 7.4% 10Y total return vs SCI's 226.8%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.56, current ratio 1.36x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 5.4% revenue growth vs HI's -16.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (13.6x vs 16.4x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 14.5% margin vs GTLS's 0.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.11 vs HI's 1.92 | |
| Dividends | 2.8% yield, 4-year raise streak, vs FELE's 1.1% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +65.2% vs SCI's +3.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 7.6% ROA vs GTLS's 0.4%, ROIC 14.7% vs 7.4% |
SCI vs HI vs FELE vs CSV vs GTLS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
SCI vs HI vs FELE vs CSV vs GTLS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CSV leads in 2 of 6 categories
SCI leads 1 • FELE leads 1 • HI leads 0 • GTLS leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SCI leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SCI is the larger business by revenue, generating $4.3B annually — 10.4x CSV's $416M. SCI is the more profitable business, keeping 14.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to GTLS's 0.9%. On growth, FELE holds the edge at +9.9% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $4.3B | $2.5B | $2.2B | $416M | $4.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $1.2B | $286M | $322M | $111M | $644M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $626M | $35M | $150M | $44M | $40M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $629M | $8M | $169M | $40M | $203M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +26.2% | +33.7% | +35.2% | +35.3% | +32.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +22.4% | +6.1% | +12.6% | +22.2% | +8.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +14.5% | +1.4% | +6.9% | +10.6% | +0.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +14.5% | +0.3% | +7.8% | +9.7% | +4.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +2.1% | -22.2% | +9.9% | -0.9% | -2.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +65.3% | -133.1% | +13.4% | -37.3% | -36.1% |
Valuation Metrics
CSV leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 14.3x trailing earnings, CSV trades at a 98% valuation discount to GTLS's 629.6x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), CSV offers better value at 0.48x vs SCI's 3.62x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $10.9B | $2.3B | $4.5B | $739M | $9.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $15.8B | $3.7B | $4.6B | $1.3B | $13.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 20.64x | 52.43x | 31.07x | 14.33x | 629.58x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 18.77x | 12.41x | 22.00x | 13.56x | 16.43x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 3.62x | — | 3.56x | 0.48x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 12.01x | 12.54x | 13.95x | 10.43x | 14.35x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.53x | 0.85x | 2.09x | 1.77x | 2.33x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 6.83x | 1.59x | 3.44x | 2.86x | 2.79x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 19.63x | 126.31x | 23.04x | 18.44x | 49.04x |
Profitability & Efficiency
FELE leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
SCI delivers a 39.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $39 in annual profit, vs $1 for GTLS. FELE carries lower financial leverage with a 0.21x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to SCI's 3.14x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), SCI scores 7/9 vs GTLS's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +39.4% | +2.4% | +11.4% | +17.6% | +1.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +3.4% | +0.8% | +7.6% | +3.3% | +0.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +11.3% | +3.8% | +14.7% | +9.4% | +7.4% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +5.6% | +4.2% | +18.1% | +7.9% | +8.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 3.14x | 1.12x | 0.21x | 2.21x | 1.11x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $4.9B | $1.4B | $181M | $561M | $3.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $244M | $165M | $100M | $2M | $366M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $5.1B | $1.6B | $280M | $563M | $3.7B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 3.78x | 0.67x | 24.75x | 2.33x | 1.08x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CSV leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in SCI five years ago would be worth $15,128 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $7,739 for HI. Over the past 12 months, HI leads with a +65.2% total return vs SCI's +3.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CSV at 21.0% vs HI's -9.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +2.0% | +0.8% | +4.4% | +12.8% | +0.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +3.8% | +65.2% | +17.9% | +16.3% | +37.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +25.3% | -26.5% | +10.8% | +77.2% | +63.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +51.3% | -22.6% | +21.2% | +26.9% | +33.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +226.8% | +33.0% | +233.1% | +112.1% | +740.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +7.8% | -9.8% | +3.5% | +21.0% | +17.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — SCI and HI each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
SCI is the less volatile stock with a 0.11 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than HI's 1.92 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. HI currently trades 99.7% from its 52-week high vs SCI's 88.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.11x | 1.92x | 0.92x | 0.66x | 0.56x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $88.67 | $32.07 | $111.53 | $52.14 | $208.51 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $74.14 | $18.46 | $83.42 | $39.38 | $140.50 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +88.5% | +99.7% | +90.5% | +89.3% | +99.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 40.2 | 68.2 | 52.1 | 48.3 | 50.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.2M | 0 | 284K | 94K | 1.6M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — HI and FELE each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: SCI as "Buy", HI as "Buy", FELE as "Hold", CSV as "Buy", GTLS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 18.6% upside for SCI (target: $93) vs -6.7% for GTLS (target: $194). For income investors, HI offers the higher dividend yield at 2.80% vs GTLS's 0.29%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $93.00 | $32.00 | $100.00 | $50.00 | $193.81 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 9 | 11 | 11 | 7 | 37 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.6% | +2.8% | +1.1% | +1.0% | +0.3% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 12 | 4 | 32 | 6 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.29 | $0.90 | $1.11 | $0.45 | $0.60 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +4.2% | 0.0% | +3.7% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
CSV leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Total Returns). SCI leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 2 tied.
SCI vs HI vs FELE vs CSV vs GTLS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SCI or HI or FELE or CSV or GTLS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Franklin Electric Co.
, Inc. (FELE) is the stronger pick with 5. 4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -16. 0% for Hillenbrand, Inc. (HI). Carriage Services, Inc. (CSV) offers the better valuation at 14. 3x trailing P/E (13. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Service Corporation International (SCI) a "Buy" — based on 9 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 — SCI or HI or FELE or CSV or GTLS?
On trailing P/E, Carriage Services, Inc.
(CSV) is the cheapest at 14. 3x versus Chart Industries, Inc. at 629. 6x. On forward P/E, Hillenbrand, Inc. is actually cheaper at 12. 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: Carriage Services, Inc. wins at 0. 46x versus Service Corporation International's 3. 29x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — SCI or HI or FELE or CSV or GTLS?
Over the past 5 years, Service Corporation International (SCI) delivered a total return of +51.
3%, compared to -22. 6% for Hillenbrand, Inc. (HI). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GTLS returned +740. 5% versus HI's +33. 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 — SCI or HI or FELE or CSV or GTLS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Service Corporation International (SCI) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
11β versus Hillenbrand, Inc. 's 1. 92β — meaning HI is approximately 1583% more volatile than SCI relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Franklin Electric Co. , Inc. (FELE) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 21% versus 3% for Service Corporation International — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — SCI or HI or FELE or CSV or GTLS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Franklin Electric Co.
, Inc. (FELE) is pulling ahead at 5. 4% versus -16. 0% for Hillenbrand, Inc. (HI). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Hillenbrand, Inc. grew EPS 120. 3% year-over-year, compared to -92. 0% for Chart Industries, Inc.. 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 — SCI or HI or FELE or CSV or GTLS?
Service Corporation International (SCI) is the more profitable company, earning 12.
6% net margin versus 1. 0% for Chart Industries, Inc. — meaning it keeps 12. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CSV leads at 23. 7% versus 5. 9% for HI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FELE leads at 35. 5%, 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 SCI or HI or FELE or CSV or GTLS 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, Carriage Services, Inc. (CSV) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 46x versus Service Corporation International's 3. 29x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Hillenbrand, Inc. (HI) trades at 12. 4x forward P/E versus 22. 0x for Franklin Electric Co. , Inc. — 9. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for SCI: 18. 6% to $93. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — SCI or HI or FELE or CSV or GTLS?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Hillenbrand, Inc. (HI) offers the highest yield at 2. 8%, versus 0. 3% for Chart Industries, Inc. (GTLS).
09Is SCI or HI or FELE or CSV or GTLS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Service Corporation International (SCI) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
11), 1. 6% yield, +226. 8% 10Y return). Hillenbrand, Inc. (HI) carries a higher beta of 1. 92 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (SCI: +226. 8%, HI: +33. 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.
10What are the main differences between SCI and HI and FELE and CSV and GTLS?
These companies operate in different sectors (SCI (Consumer Cyclical) and HI (Industrials) and FELE (Industrials) and CSV (Consumer Cyclical) and GTLS (Industrials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: SCI is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; HI is a small-cap quality compounder stock; FELE is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CSV is a small-cap deep-value stock; GTLS is a small-cap quality compounder stock. SCI, HI, FELE, CSV pay a dividend while GTLS 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.
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.