Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Snap-on Incorporated
How Snap-on Incorporated stacks up
SNA · against 445 other Industrials companies listed in US-listed
Growth
43/ 100
Below the middle of the pack.
Ranked #299 of 446 · scores higher than 32% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the growth score51 peers with a growth score of 40–49, including SNA · Click a bar to see the companies
Why growth scores 43?
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: 1.8% vs peer median 4.2%
- Earnings per share growth is close to the peer norm. Earnings per share growth: 4.2% vs peer median 7.1%
- Revenue growth is close to the peer norm. Revenue growth: 4.0% vs peer median 4.4%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = SNA, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | SNA | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue growthHigher is better · 462 reported | 4.0% | 8.4% | 31% | 33% | |
| Earnings per share growthHigher is better · 328 reported | 4.2% | 9.2% | 41% | 33% | |
| 3-year revenue growthHigher is better · 437 reported | 1.8% | 5.2% | 32% | 33% |
Ranking by growth score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around SNA| 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 | |
| 299 | 235M USD | 43 | 43 | |
| 299 | 4.2B USD | 43 | 55 | |
| 299 | 738M USD | 43 | 22 | |
| 299 | 641M USD | 43 | 51 | |
| 299 | 18.7B USD | 43 | 71 | |
| 299 | 180.3B USD | 43 | 49 | |
| 305 | 921M USD | 42 | 39 | |
| 305 | 15.4B USD | 42 | 54 | |
| 305 | 5.1B USD | 42 | 54 |
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