Manufacturing - Tools & Accessories
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
TKR vs NNBR vs NN vs GTLS vs ESAB
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Conglomerates
Internet Content & Information
Industrial - Machinery
Manufacturing - Metal Fabrication
TKR vs NNBR vs NN vs GTLS vs ESAB — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Manufacturing - Tools & Accessories | Conglomerates | Internet Content & Information | Industrial - Machinery | Manufacturing - Metal Fabrication |
| Market Cap | $8.12B | $139M | $2.64B | $9.93B | $6.24B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $4.67B | $435M | $5M | $4.26B | $2.91B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $316M | $-35M | $-189M | $40M | $207M |
| Gross Margin | 20.4% | 2.3% | -256.2% | 32.6% | 35.4% |
| Operating Margin | 12.6% | -3.3% | -15.4% | 8.5% | 16.2% |
| Forward P/E | 19.7x | 43.6x | — | 16.4x | 17.7x |
| Total Debt | $2.16B | $211M | $15M | $3.74B | $1.43B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $365M | $11M | $45M | $366M | $186M |
TKR vs NNBR vs NN vs GTLS vs ESAB — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Mar 22 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Timken Company (TKR) | 100 | 191.7 | +91.7% |
| NN, Inc. (NNBR) | 100 | 95.8 | -4.2% |
| NextNav Inc. (NN) | 100 | 260.5 | +160.5% |
| Chart Industries, I… (GTLS) | 100 | 120.7 | +20.7% |
| ESAB Corporation (ESAB) | 100 | 204.8 | +104.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TKR vs NNBR vs NN vs GTLS vs ESAB
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TKR carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 16 yrs, beta 1.50, yield 1.2%
- Beta 1.50, yield 1.2%, current ratio 2.82x
- 1.2% yield, 16-year raise streak, vs GTLS's 0.3%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
- +78.1% vs ESAB's -15.8%
NNBR lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
Among these 5 stocks, NN doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
GTLS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 7.7% 10Y total return vs ESAB's 107.2%
- Better valuation composite
- Beta 0.56 vs NNBR's 2.04, lower leverage
ESAB ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 3.7%, EPS growth -13.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 3.1%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.24, Low D/E 64.8%, current ratio 1.90x
- PEG 2.44 vs TKR's 9.80
- 3.7% revenue growth vs NN's -19.3%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 3.7% revenue growth vs NN's -19.3% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 7.1% margin vs NN's -41.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.56 vs NNBR's 2.04, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.2% yield, 16-year raise streak, vs GTLS's 0.3%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +78.1% vs ESAB's -15.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 4.7% ROA vs NN's -73.1% |
TKR vs NNBR vs NN vs GTLS vs ESAB — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
TKR vs NNBR vs NN vs GTLS vs ESAB — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
TKR leads in 2 of 6 categories
ESAB leads 1 • NNBR leads 1 • NN leads 1 • GTLS leads 1
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ESAB leads this category, winning 3 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. ESAB is the more profitable business, keeping 7.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NN's -41.4%. On growth, NNBR holds the edge at +12.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $4.7B | $435M | $5M | $4.3B | $2.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $766M | $22M | -$62M | $644M | $539M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $316M | -$35M | -$189M | $40M | $207M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $383M | -$1M | -$51M | $203M | $218M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +20.4% | +2.3% | -2.6% | +32.6% | +35.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +12.6% | -3.3% | -15.4% | +8.5% | +16.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +6.8% | -8.0% | -41.4% | +0.9% | +7.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +8.2% | -0.3% | -11.2% | +4.8% | +7.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +8.0% | +12.1% | -50.5% | -2.5% | +9.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +26.1% | -8.7% | -85.2% | -36.1% | -29.1% |
Valuation Metrics
NNBR leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 27.5x trailing earnings, ESAB trades at a 96% valuation discount to GTLS's 628.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), ESAB offers better value at 3.79x vs TKR's 14.06x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $8.1B | $139M | $2.6B | $9.9B | $6.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $9.9B | $338M | $2.6B | $13.3B | $7.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 28.31x | -2.58x | -13.74x | 628.45x | 27.53x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 19.74x | 43.60x | — | 16.40x | 17.74x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 14.06x | — | — | — | 3.79x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 12.45x | 19.03x | — | 14.33x | 13.00x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.77x | 0.33x | 577.54x | 2.33x | 2.19x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.44x | 0.93x | — | 2.79x | 2.82x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 19.99x | 19.16x | — | 48.95x | 29.24x |
Profitability & Efficiency
TKR leads this category, winning 5 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 $-28 for NNBR. TKR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.64x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NNBR's 1.44x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), TKR scores 5/9 vs NN's 3/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +9.5% | -28.4% | — | +1.2% | +9.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +4.7% | -7.7% | -73.1% | +0.4% | +4.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +8.5% | -4.5% | — | +7.4% | +11.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +10.0% | -5.0% | -36.6% | +8.6% | +13.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.64x | 1.44x | — | 1.11x | 0.65x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.8B | $200M | -$30M | $3.4B | $1.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $365M | $11M | $45M | $366M | $186M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $2.2B | $211M | $15M | $3.7B | $1.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 6.17x | -0.74x | -5.64x | 1.08x | 3.40x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
NN leads this category, winning 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ESAB five years ago would be worth $20,716 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,660 for NNBR. Over the past 12 months, TKR leads with a +78.1% total return vs ESAB's -15.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NN at 109.2% vs TKR's 16.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +35.2% | +106.0% | +20.3% | +0.6% | -8.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +78.1% | +50.8% | +41.4% | +37.6% | -15.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +58.4% | +178.4% | +816.0% | +62.7% | +75.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +34.5% | -63.4% | +96.1% | +29.5% | +107.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +294.0% | -75.7% | +100.1% | +772.5% | +107.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +16.6% | +40.7% | +109.2% | +17.6% | +20.7% |
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 NNBR's 2.04 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 ESAB's 74.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.50x | 2.04x | 1.33x | 0.56x | 1.24x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $123.67 | $2.99 | $24.19 | $208.51 | $137.42 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $65.85 | $1.10 | $10.84 | $140.50 | $89.41 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +94.1% | +92.3% | +80.7% | +99.5% | +74.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 70.2 | 65.6 | 55.2 | 51.2 | 50.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 762K | 936K | 2.2M | 1.6M | 612K |
Analyst Outlook
TKR leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: TKR as "Buy", NNBR as "Buy", NN as "Buy", GTLS as "Buy", ESAB as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 43.2% upside for ESAB (target: $147) vs -6.5% for GTLS (target: $194). For income investors, TKR offers the higher dividend yield at 1.20% vs GTLS's 0.29%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $115.33 | — | $26.33 | $193.81 | $146.67 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 24 | 9 | 3 | 37 | 10 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.2% | — | — | +0.3% | +0.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 16 | 0 | — | 1 | 4 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.40 | — | — | $0.60 | $0.36 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.7% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
TKR leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Analyst Outlook). ESAB leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow).
TKR vs NNBR vs NN vs GTLS vs ESAB: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TKR or NNBR or NN or GTLS or ESAB a better buy right now?
For growth investors, ESAB Corporation (ESAB) is the stronger pick with 3.
7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -19. 3% for NextNav Inc. (NN). ESAB Corporation (ESAB) offers the better valuation at 27. 5x trailing P/E (17. 7x 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 NNBR or NN or GTLS or ESAB?
On trailing P/E, ESAB Corporation (ESAB) is the cheapest at 27.
5x versus Chart Industries, Inc. at 628. 5x. On forward P/E, Chart Industries, Inc. is actually cheaper at 16. 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: ESAB Corporation wins at 2. 44x versus The Timken Company's 9. 80x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TKR or NNBR or NN or GTLS or ESAB?
Over the past 5 years, ESAB Corporation (ESAB) delivered a total return of +107.
2%, compared to -63. 4% for NN, Inc. (NNBR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GTLS returned +772. 5% versus NNBR's -75. 7%. 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 NNBR or NN or GTLS or ESAB?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Chart Industries, Inc.
(GTLS) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 56β versus NN, Inc. 's 2. 04β — meaning NNBR is approximately 266% more volatile than GTLS 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.
05Which is growing faster — TKR or NNBR or NN or GTLS or ESAB?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), ESAB Corporation (ESAB) is pulling ahead at 3.
7% versus -19. 3% for NextNav Inc. (NN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: NN, Inc. grew EPS 3. 6% 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 NNBR or NN or GTLS or ESAB?
ESAB Corporation (ESAB) is the more profitable company, earning 8.
0% net margin versus -41. 4% for NextNav Inc. — meaning it keeps 8. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ESAB leads at 17. 3% versus -1535. 8% for NN. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ESAB 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 TKR or NNBR or NN or GTLS or ESAB 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, ESAB Corporation (ESAB) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 2. 44x 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, Chart Industries, Inc. (GTLS) trades at 16. 4x forward P/E versus 43. 6x for NN, Inc. — 27. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ESAB: 43. 2% to $146. 67.
08Which pays a better dividend — TKR or NNBR or NN or GTLS or ESAB?
In this comparison, TKR (1.
2% yield), ESAB (0. 4% yield), GTLS (0. 3% yield) pay a dividend. NNBR, NN do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is TKR or NNBR or NN or GTLS or ESAB 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). 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 (GTLS: +772. 5%, NNBR: -75. 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.
10What are the main differences between TKR and NNBR and NN and GTLS and ESAB?
These companies operate in different sectors (TKR (Industrials) and NNBR (Industrials) and NN (Communication Services) and GTLS (Industrials) and ESAB (Industrials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
TKR pays a dividend while NNBR, NN, GTLS, ESAB 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.