Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Enerpac Tool Group Corp.
How Enerpac Tool Group Corp. stacks up
EPAC · against 445 other Industrials companies listed in US-listed
Growth
47/ 100
Below the middle of the pack.
Ranked #274 of 446 · scores higher than 38% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the growth score51 peers with a growth score of 40–49, including EPAC · Click a bar to see the companies
Why growth scores 47?
Weighted metrics compared with all Industrials companies.Its metrics sit close to the Industrials norm.
- 3-year revenue growth is close to the peer norm. 3-year revenue growth: 2.5% vs peer median 4.2%
- Revenue growth is close to the peer norm. Revenue growth: 4.3% vs peer median 4.4%
- Earnings per share growth is close to the peer norm. Earnings per share growth: 10.5% vs peer median 7.1%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = EPAC, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | EPAC | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue growthHigher is better · 462 reported | 4.3% | 8.4% | 33% | 33% | |
| Earnings per share growthHigher is better · 328 reported | 10.5% | 9.2% | 51% | 33% | |
| 3-year revenue growthHigher is better · 437 reported | 2.5% | 5.2% | 35% | 33% |
Ranking by growth score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around EPAC| Rank | Company | Market cap | Growth | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 63.0B USD | 100 | 55 | |
| 1 | 2.5B USD | 100 | 70 | |
| 1 | 8.7B USD | 100 | 53 | |
| 1 | 727M USD | 100 | 66 | |
| 1 | 5.2B USD | 100 | 56 | |
| 268 | 9.4B USD | 49 | 48 | |
| 272 | 436M USD | 48 | 73 | |
| 272 | 75.3B USD | 48 | 39 | |
| 274 | 4.1B USD | 47 | 24 | |
| 274 | 2.2B USD | 47 | 65 | |
| 274 | 46.8B USD | 47 | 52 | |
| 274 | 4.3B USD | 47 | 64 | |
| 274 | 74.4B USD | 47 | 47 | |
| 274 | 1.7B USD | 47 | 49 |
Scores are sector-relative percentiles from the latest snapshot, always calculated against the whole sector: narrowing the comparison group changes who you compare with, not the scores. Missing metrics are left out and the remaining weights rescaled. How we score