Cummins vs Oshkosh
Add, change or remove companies; up to four.
KIRA’s take AI analyst
I put Cummins and Oshkosh side by side, using each one’s latest annual report. Here is what stands out:
- Cummins is the larger business, with $33.7B of revenue in fiscal 2025 against $10.4B for Oshkosh, about 3.2 times as much.
- Cummins grew revenue faster (−1.3%, against −2.9%).
- Cummins kept more of each dollar of sales as operating profit (12.0% operating margin, against 9.0%).
- Cummins turned more of its sales into free cash flow (7.1% FCF margin, against 5.9%).
- Cummins earned a higher return on the capital invested in it (18.3%, against 14.8%).
- Investors pay more for each dollar of Cummins’s earnings: a P/E of 26.7x against 14.8x for Oshkosh.
Who comes out ahead
Of the 11 measures where higher (or lower) is clearly better, how many each company leads.
Cummins
CMI
9/11
Revenue growth5-year growthGross marginOperating marginNet marginFCF marginReturn on capitalReturn on equityPiotroski F-score
Oshkosh
OSK
2/11
Net debt / EBITDAShare count change
Side by side
Best in the row
| Latest fiscal year | CMI FY25 | OSK FY25 |
|---|---|---|
| Size | ||
| Market cap | $72.3B | $8.4B |
| Revenue | $33.7B | $10.4B |
| Free cash flow | $2.4B | $618M |
| Net income | $3.0B | $647M |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth | −1.3% | −2.9% |
| 5-year growth | 11.2% | 8.7% |
| Share count change | −0.3% | −1.9% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 25.3% | 17.5% |
| Operating margin | 12.0% | 9.0% |
| Net margin | 8.8% | 6.2% |
| FCF margin | 7.1% | 5.9% |
| Return on capital | 18.3% | 14.8% |
| Return on equity | 26.2% | 14.9% |
| Balance sheet | ||
| Net debt | $3.6B | $692M |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.7x | 0.6x |
| Dividends and buybacks | $1.1B | $408M |
| Valuation & quality | ||
| P/E | 26.7x | 14.8x |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 | 5 |
Ten years
Revenue
Operating margin
Free cash flow
Return on capital
Each company's latest fiscal year; fiscal years end in different months. The best value in each row is highlighted where higher (or lower) is clearly better. Not investment advice.