Hardware, Equipment & Parts
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
TEL vs APH vs HUBB vs ROG vs BDC
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Hardware, Equipment & Parts
Electrical Equipment & Parts
Hardware, Equipment & Parts
Communication Equipment
TEL vs APH vs HUBB vs ROG vs BDC — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Hardware, Equipment & Parts | Hardware, Equipment & Parts | Electrical Equipment & Parts | Hardware, Equipment & Parts | Communication Equipment |
| Market Cap | $63.43B | $170.24B | $26.71B | $2.51B | $4.46B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $18.52B | $25.90B | $6.00B | $813M | $2.79B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $2.91B | $4.48B | $906M | $-56M | $237M |
| Gross Margin | 35.4% | 37.3% | 35.5% | 31.6% | 35.8% |
| Operating Margin | 19.3% | 26.0% | 20.8% | -2.5% | 12.3% |
| Forward P/E | 19.3x | 29.7x | 25.5x | 38.6x | 14.5x |
| Total Debt | $6.55B | $15.50B | $2.61B | $40M | $1.47B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $1.25B | $11.13B | $483M | $197M | $390M |
TEL vs APH vs HUBB vs ROG vs BDC — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| TE Connectivity Ltd. (TEL) | 100 | 266.1 | +166.1% |
| Amphenol Corporation (APH) | 100 | 573.6 | +473.6% |
| Hubbell Incorporated (HUBB) | 100 | 410.3 | +310.3% |
| Rogers Corporation (ROG) | 100 | 129.9 | +29.9% |
| Belden Inc. (BDC) | 100 | 336.8 | +236.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TEL vs APH vs HUBB vs ROG vs BDC
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TEL ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 1.58, yield 1.2%
- 1.2% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs APH's 0.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
APH carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 51.7%, EPS growth 74.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 22.3%
- 9.2% 10Y total return vs HUBB's 413.6%
- 51.7% revenue growth vs ROG's -2.3%
- 17.3% margin vs ROG's -6.9%
Among these 5 stocks, HUBB doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
ROG is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night and defensive is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.24, Low D/E 3.3%, current ratio 3.97x
- Beta 1.24, current ratio 3.97x
- Beta 1.24 vs APH's 1.62, lower leverage
- +123.4% vs BDC's +10.9%
BDC is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.39 vs HUBB's 1.22
- Lower P/E (14.5x vs 38.6x)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 51.7% revenue growth vs ROG's -2.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (14.5x vs 38.6x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 17.3% margin vs ROG's -6.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.24 vs APH's 1.62, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.2% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs APH's 0.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +123.4% vs BDC's +10.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.6% ROA vs ROG's -3.9%, ROIC 28.3% vs 3.6% |
TEL vs APH vs HUBB vs ROG vs BDC — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
TEL vs APH vs HUBB vs ROG vs BDC — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
APH leads in 2 of 6 categories
BDC leads 1 • ROG leads 1 • TEL leads 1 • HUBB leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
APH leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
APH is the larger business by revenue, generating $25.9B annually — 31.9x ROG's $813M. APH is the more profitable business, keeping 17.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ROG's -6.9%. On growth, APH holds the edge at +58.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $18.5B | $25.9B | $6.0B | $813M | $2.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $4.3B | $7.9B | $1.5B | $35M | $475M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $2.9B | $4.5B | $906M | -$56M | $237M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $3.4B | $4.6B | $909M | $100M | $180M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +35.4% | +37.3% | +35.5% | +31.6% | +35.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +19.3% | +26.0% | +20.8% | -2.5% | +12.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +15.7% | +17.3% | +15.1% | -6.9% | +8.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +18.3% | +17.9% | +15.2% | +12.3% | +6.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +14.5% | +58.4% | +11.1% | +5.2% | +11.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +66.0% | +24.1% | +8.3% | +4.2% | +2.4% |
Valuation Metrics
BDC leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 19.4x trailing earnings, BDC trades at a 53% valuation discount to APH's 41.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), BDC offers better value at 0.52x vs APH's 1.49x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $63.4B | $170.2B | $26.7B | $2.5B | $4.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $68.7B | $174.6B | $28.8B | $2.4B | $5.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 35.09x | 41.46x | 30.37x | -41.84x | 19.40x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 19.28x | 29.69x | 25.48x | 38.62x | 14.47x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.49x | 1.46x | — | 0.52x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 16.97x | 25.33x | 21.17x | 22.38x | 12.03x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 3.71x | 7.37x | 4.57x | 3.09x | 1.64x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 5.08x | 13.09x | 6.97x | 2.16x | 3.65x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 19.80x | 38.88x | 30.53x | 35.27x | 20.41x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — APH and ROG each lead in 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
APH delivers a 34.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $35 in annual profit, vs $-5 for ROG. ROG carries lower financial leverage with a 0.03x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to BDC's 1.17x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), HUBB scores 7/9 vs ROG's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +22.5% | +34.6% | +24.4% | -4.7% | +18.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +11.5% | +13.6% | +11.6% | -3.9% | +6.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +14.1% | +28.3% | +17.1% | +3.6% | +11.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +16.9% | +25.5% | +20.1% | +3.9% | +12.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 4 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.51x | 1.15x | 0.68x | 0.03x | 1.17x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $5.3B | $4.4B | $2.1B | -$157M | $1.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1.3B | $11.1B | $483M | $197M | $390M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $6.5B | $15.5B | $2.6B | $40M | $1.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 31.48x | 13.54x | 16.90x | 64.38x | 6.89x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
APH leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in APH five years ago would be worth $42,142 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $7,363 for ROG. Over the past 12 months, ROG leads with a +123.4% total return vs BDC's +10.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors APH at 55.0% vs ROG's -4.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -7.0% | -0.7% | +8.8% | +52.9% | -2.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +47.5% | +74.8% | +45.8% | +123.4% | +10.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +82.6% | +272.5% | +91.3% | -12.7% | +43.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +68.1% | +321.4% | +163.3% | -26.4% | +128.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +299.1% | +917.7% | +413.6% | +122.4% | +88.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +22.2% | +55.0% | +24.1% | -4.4% | +12.8% |
Risk & Volatility
ROG leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ROG is the less volatile stock with a 1.24 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than APH's 1.62 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ROG currently trades 97.8% from its 52-week high vs BDC's 71.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.58x | 1.62x | 1.38x | 1.24x | 1.41x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $252.56 | $167.04 | $565.50 | $143.81 | $159.99 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $147.75 | $79.10 | $346.07 | $61.17 | $102.49 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +85.6% | +82.9% | +88.8% | +97.8% | +71.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 41.9 | 42.5 | 43.2 | 72.9 | 33.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 2.3M | 8.3M | 542K | 199K | 376K |
Analyst Outlook
TEL leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: TEL as "Buy", APH as "Buy", HUBB as "Hold", ROG as "Buy", BDC as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 30.8% upside for BDC (target: $150) vs 6.5% for HUBB (target: $535). For income investors, TEL offers the higher dividend yield at 1.24% vs BDC's 0.17%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $262.57 | $180.33 | $535.14 | $150.00 | $150.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 29 | 29 | 17 | 12 | 14 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.2% | +0.5% | +1.1% | — | +0.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 15 | 15 | 12 | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $2.69 | $0.63 | $5.35 | — | $0.20 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +2.1% | +0.4% | +0.8% | +2.1% | +4.8% |
APH leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). BDC leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
TEL vs APH vs HUBB vs ROG vs BDC: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TEL or APH or HUBB or ROG or BDC a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Amphenol Corporation (APH) is the stronger pick with 51.
7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -2. 3% for Rogers Corporation (ROG). Belden Inc. (BDC) offers the better valuation at 19. 4x trailing P/E (14. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate TE Connectivity Ltd. (TEL) 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.
02Which has the better valuation — TEL or APH or HUBB or ROG or BDC?
On trailing P/E, Belden Inc.
(BDC) is the cheapest at 19. 4x versus Amphenol Corporation at 41. 5x. On forward P/E, Belden Inc. is actually cheaper at 14. 5x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Belden Inc. wins at 0. 39x versus Hubbell Incorporated's 1. 22x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TEL or APH or HUBB or ROG or BDC?
Over the past 5 years, Amphenol Corporation (APH) delivered a total return of +321.
4%, compared to -26. 4% for Rogers Corporation (ROG). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: APH returned +917. 7% versus BDC's +88. 3%. 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 — TEL or APH or HUBB or ROG or BDC?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Rogers Corporation (ROG) is the lower-risk stock at 1.
24β versus Amphenol Corporation's 1. 62β — meaning APH is approximately 30% more volatile than ROG relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Rogers Corporation (ROG) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 3% versus 117% for Belden Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — TEL or APH or HUBB or ROG or BDC?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Amphenol Corporation (APH) is pulling ahead at 51.
7% versus -2. 3% for Rogers Corporation (ROG). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Amphenol Corporation grew EPS 74. 0% year-over-year, compared to -340. 0% for Rogers Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, APH leads at 22. 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 — TEL or APH or HUBB or ROG or BDC?
Amphenol Corporation (APH) is the more profitable company, earning 18.
5% net margin versus -7. 6% for Rogers Corporation — meaning it keeps 18. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: APH leads at 25. 9% versus 6. 4% for ROG. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — APH leads at 36. 9%, 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 TEL or APH or HUBB or ROG or BDC 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, Belden Inc. (BDC) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 39x versus Hubbell Incorporated's 1. 22x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Belden Inc. (BDC) trades at 14. 5x forward P/E versus 38. 6x for Rogers Corporation — 24. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for BDC: 30. 8% to $150. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — TEL or APH or HUBB or ROG or BDC?
In this comparison, TEL (1.
2% yield), HUBB (1. 1% yield), APH (0. 5% yield), BDC (0. 2% yield) pay a dividend. ROG does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is TEL or APH or HUBB or ROG or BDC better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Hubbell Incorporated (HUBB) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (1.
1% yield, +413. 6% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (HUBB: +413. 6%, BDC: +88. 3%), 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 TEL and APH and HUBB and ROG and BDC?
These companies operate in different sectors (TEL (Technology) and APH (Technology) and HUBB (Industrials) and ROG (Technology) and BDC (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: TEL is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; APH is a mid-cap high-growth stock; HUBB is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; ROG is a small-cap quality compounder stock; BDC is a small-cap quality compounder stock. TEL, HUBB pay a dividend while APH, ROG, BDC 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.