Manufacturing - Tools & Accessories
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
TKR vs GTLS vs RBC vs FBIN vs NN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Industrial - Machinery
Manufacturing - Tools & Accessories
Construction
Internet Content & Information
TKR vs GTLS vs RBC vs FBIN vs NN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Manufacturing - Tools & Accessories | Industrial - Machinery | Manufacturing - Tools & Accessories | Construction | Internet Content & Information |
| Market Cap | $8.12B | $9.93B | $20.01B | $4.68B | $2.64B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $4.67B | $4.26B | $1.79B | $3.36B | $5M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $316M | $40M | $269M | $195M | $-189M |
| Gross Margin | 20.4% | 32.6% | 44.3% | 45.6% | -256.2% |
| Operating Margin | 12.6% | 8.5% | 23.8% | 10.6% | -15.4% |
| Forward P/E | 19.7x | 16.4x | 50.3x | 11.5x | — |
| Total Debt | $2.16B | $3.74B | $1.03B | $2.54B | $15M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $365M | $366M | $37M | $264M | $45M |
TKR vs GTLS vs RBC vs FBIN vs NN — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Nov 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Timken Company (TKR) | 100 | 158.4 | +58.4% |
| Chart Industries, I… (GTLS) | 100 | 200.6 | +100.6% |
| RBC Bearings Incorp… (RBC) | 100 | 513.9 | +413.9% |
| Fortune Brands Inno… (FBIN) | 100 | 54.8 | -45.2% |
| NextNav Inc. (NN) | 100 | 197.1 | +97.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TKR vs GTLS vs RBC vs FBIN vs NN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TKR is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability is your priority.
- Dividend streak 16 yrs, beta 1.50, yield 1.2%
- 1.2% yield, 16-year raise streak, vs FBIN's 2.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
GTLS ranks third and is worth considering specifically for stability.
- Beta 0.56 vs FBIN's 1.61
RBC carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 4.9%, EPS growth 20.3%, 3Y rev CAGR 20.2%
- 8.7% 10Y total return vs GTLS's 7.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.05, Low D/E 33.9%, current ratio 3.26x
- Beta 1.05, yield 0.1%, current ratio 3.26x
FBIN is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 2.77 vs TKR's 9.80
- Better valuation composite
Among these 5 stocks, NN doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 4.9% revenue growth vs NN's -19.3% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 15.0% margin vs NN's -41.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.56 vs FBIN's 1.61 | |
| Dividends | 1.2% yield, 16-year raise streak, vs FBIN's 2.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +78.8% vs FBIN's -16.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 5.2% ROA vs NN's -73.1% |
TKR vs GTLS vs RBC vs FBIN vs NN — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
TKR vs GTLS vs RBC vs FBIN vs NN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
RBC leads in 3 of 6 categories
FBIN leads 1 • GTLS leads 1 • TKR leads 0 • NN leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
RBC leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TKR is the larger business by revenue, generating $4.7B annually — 1021.8x NN's $5M. RBC is the more profitable business, keeping 15.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NN's -41.4%. On growth, RBC holds the edge at +17.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $4.7B | $4.3B | $1.8B | $3.4B | $5M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $766M | $644M | $548M | $482M | -$62M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $316M | $40M | $269M | $195M | -$189M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $383M | $203M | $330M | $420M | -$51M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +20.4% | +32.6% | +44.3% | +45.6% | -2.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +12.6% | +8.5% | +23.8% | +10.6% | -15.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +6.8% | +0.9% | +15.0% | +5.8% | -41.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +8.2% | +4.8% | +18.4% | +12.5% | -11.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +8.0% | -2.5% | +17.0% | -106.4% | -50.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +26.1% | -36.1% | +17.0% | -2.0% | -85.2% |
Valuation Metrics
FBIN leads this category, winning 6 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 15.8x trailing earnings, FBIN trades at a 97% valuation discount to GTLS's 628.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), FBIN offers better value at 2.77x vs TKR's 14.06x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $8.1B | $9.9B | $20.0B | $4.7B | $2.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $9.9B | $13.3B | $21.0B | $7.0B | $2.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 28.31x | 628.45x | 79.45x | 15.82x | -13.74x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 19.74x | 16.40x | 50.32x | 11.50x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 14.06x | — | 9.07x | 2.77x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 12.45x | 14.33x | 42.86x | 10.08x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.77x | 2.33x | 12.23x | 1.05x | 577.54x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.44x | 2.79x | 6.13x | 1.98x | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 19.99x | 48.95x | 82.06x | 12.77x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
RBC leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
TKR delivers a 9.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $10 in annual profit, vs $1 for GTLS. RBC carries lower financial leverage with a 0.34x 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 NN's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +9.5% | +1.2% | +8.2% | +8.3% | — |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +4.7% | +0.4% | +5.2% | +3.0% | -73.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +8.5% | +7.4% | +6.9% | +8.1% | — |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +10.0% | +8.6% | +8.5% | +9.9% | -36.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 7 | 3 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.64x | 1.11x | 0.34x | 1.07x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.8B | $3.4B | $992M | $2.3B | -$30M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $365M | $366M | $37M | $264M | $45M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $2.2B | $3.7B | $1.0B | $2.5B | $15M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 6.17x | 1.08x | 7.78x | 4.72x | -5.64x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
RBC leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in RBC five years ago would be worth $40,698 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $4,599 for FBIN. Over the past 12 months, RBC leads with a +78.8% total return vs FBIN's -16.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NN at 109.2% vs FBIN's -13.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +35.2% | +0.6% | +33.3% | -22.8% | +20.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +78.1% | +37.6% | +78.8% | -16.8% | +41.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +58.4% | +62.7% | +173.5% | -36.3% | +816.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +34.5% | +29.5% | +307.0% | -54.0% | +96.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +294.0% | +772.5% | +867.2% | -2.4% | +100.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +16.6% | +17.6% | +39.9% | -13.9% | +109.2% |
Risk & Volatility
GTLS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
GTLS is the less volatile stock with a 0.56 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than FBIN's 1.61 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 FBIN's 60.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.50x | 0.56x | 1.05x | 1.61x | 1.33x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $123.67 | $208.51 | $632.00 | $64.84 | $24.19 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $65.85 | $140.50 | $339.53 | $36.07 | $10.84 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +94.1% | +99.5% | +96.8% | +60.3% | +80.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 70.2 | 51.2 | 66.1 | 46.8 | 55.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 762K | 1.6M | 176K | 2.6M | 2.2M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — TKR and FBIN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: TKR as "Buy", GTLS as "Buy", RBC as "Buy", FBIN as "Hold", NN as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 53.1% upside for FBIN (target: $60) vs -6.5% for GTLS (target: $194). For income investors, FBIN offers the higher dividend yield at 2.55% vs GTLS's 0.29%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $115.33 | $193.81 | $572.60 | $59.83 | $26.33 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 24 | 37 | 26 | 27 | 3 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.2% | +0.3% | +0.1% | +2.5% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 16 | 1 | 0 | 2 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.40 | $0.60 | $0.57 | $1.00 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.7% | 0.0% | +0.0% | +5.3% | 0.0% |
RBC leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). FBIN leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
TKR vs GTLS vs RBC vs FBIN vs NN: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TKR or GTLS or RBC or FBIN or NN a better buy right now?
For growth investors, RBC Bearings Incorporated (RBC) is the stronger pick with 4.
9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -19. 3% for NextNav Inc. (NN). Fortune Brands Innovations, Inc. (FBIN) offers the better valuation at 15. 8x trailing P/E (11. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate The Timken Company (TKR) a "Buy" — based on 24 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 — TKR or GTLS or RBC or FBIN or NN?
On trailing P/E, Fortune Brands Innovations, Inc.
(FBIN) is the cheapest at 15. 8x versus Chart Industries, Inc. at 628. 5x. On forward P/E, Fortune Brands Innovations, Inc. is actually cheaper at 11. 5x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Fortune Brands Innovations, Inc. wins at 2. 77x versus The Timken Company's 9. 80x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TKR or GTLS or RBC or FBIN or NN?
Over the past 5 years, RBC Bearings Incorporated (RBC) delivered a total return of +307.
0%, compared to -54. 0% for Fortune Brands Innovations, Inc. (FBIN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: RBC returned +867. 2% versus FBIN's -2. 4%. 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 — TKR or GTLS or RBC or FBIN or NN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Chart Industries, Inc.
(GTLS) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 56β versus Fortune Brands Innovations, Inc. 's 1. 61β — meaning FBIN is approximately 188% more volatile than GTLS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, RBC Bearings Incorporated (RBC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 34% versus 111% for Chart Industries, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — TKR or GTLS or RBC or FBIN or NN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), RBC Bearings Incorporated (RBC) is pulling ahead at 4.
9% versus -19. 3% for NextNav Inc. (NN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: RBC Bearings Incorporated grew EPS 20. 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 — TKR or GTLS or RBC or FBIN or NN?
RBC Bearings Incorporated (RBC) is the more profitable company, earning 15.
0% net margin versus -41. 4% for NextNav Inc. — 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 -1535. 8% for NN. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FBIN leads at 44. 8%, 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 TKR or GTLS or RBC or FBIN or NN 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, Fortune Brands Innovations, Inc. (FBIN) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 2. 77x versus The Timken Company's 9. 80x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Fortune Brands Innovations, Inc. (FBIN) trades at 11. 5x forward P/E versus 50. 3x for RBC Bearings Incorporated — 38. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FBIN: 53. 1% to $59. 83.
08Which pays a better dividend — TKR or GTLS or RBC or FBIN or NN?
In this comparison, FBIN (2.
5% yield), TKR (1. 2% yield), GTLS (0. 3% yield) pay a dividend. RBC, NN do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is TKR or GTLS or RBC or FBIN or NN 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. 56), +772. 5% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (GTLS: +772. 5%, NN: +100. 1%), 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 TKR and GTLS and RBC and FBIN and NN?
These companies operate in different sectors (TKR (Industrials) and GTLS (Industrials) and RBC (Industrials) and FBIN (Industrials) and NN (Communication Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: TKR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; GTLS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; RBC is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; FBIN is a small-cap deep-value stock; NN is a small-cap quality compounder stock. TKR, FBIN pay a dividend while GTLS, RBC, NN 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.