TKR vs NNBR

For growth investors, The Timken Company (TKR) is the stronger pick with 0.

2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -9. 1% for NN, Inc. (NNBR). The Timken Company (TKR) offers the better valuation at 29. 1x trailing P/E (20. 3x 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.

On forward P/E, The Timken Company is actually cheaper at 20.

3x.

Over the past 5 years, The Timken Company (TKR) delivered a total return of +39.

5%, compared to -64. 3% for NN, Inc. (NNBR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: TKR returned +292. 1% versus NNBR's -77. 5%. 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), The Timken Company (TKR) is the lower-risk stock at 1.

50β versus NN, Inc. 's 2. 04β — meaning NNBR is approximately 36% more volatile than TKR relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, The Timken Company (TKR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 64% versus 144% for NN, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), The Timken Company (TKR) is pulling ahead at 0.

2% versus -9. 1% for NN, Inc. (NNBR). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: NN, Inc. grew EPS 3. 6% year-over-year, compared to -17. 6% for The Timken Company. Over a 3-year CAGR, TKR leads at 0. 6% 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.

The Timken Company (TKR) is the more profitable company, earning 6.

3% net margin versus -8. 1% for NN, Inc. — meaning it keeps 6. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: TKR leads at 12. 4% versus -4. 3% for NNBR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — TKR leads at 28. 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.

On forward earnings alone, The Timken Company (TKR) trades at 20.

3x forward P/E versus 39. 8x for NN, Inc. — 19. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis.

In this comparison, TKR (1.

2% yield) pays a dividend. NNBR does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, The Timken Company (TKR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (1.

2% yield, +292. 1% 10Y return). NN, Inc. (NNBR) carries a higher beta of 2. 04 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (TKR: +292. 1%, NNBR: -77. 5%), 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 Industrials sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

TKR pays a dividend while NNBR 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.