EnerSys vs nVent Electric
Add, change or remove companies; up to four.
KIRA’s take AI analyst
I put EnerSys and nVent Electric side by side, using each one’s latest annual report. Here is what stands out:
- nVent Electric is the larger business, with $3.9B of revenue in fiscal 2025 against $3.8B for EnerSys.
- nVent Electric grew revenue faster (29.5%, against 3.7%).
- nVent Electric kept more of each dollar of sales as operating profit (15.8% operating margin, against 11.4%).
- EnerSys turned more of its sales into free cash flow (12.5% FCF margin, against 9.6%).
- EnerSys earned a higher return on the capital invested in it (13.7%, against 9.3%).
- Investors pay more for each dollar of nVent Electric’s earnings: a P/E of 35.4x against 18.1x for EnerSys.
Who comes out ahead
Of the 11 measures where higher (or lower) is clearly better, how many each company leads.
EnerSys
ENS
4/11
FCF marginReturn on capitalNet debt / EBITDAShare count change
nVent Electric
NVT
7/11
Revenue growth5-year growthGross marginOperating marginNet marginReturn on equityPiotroski F-score
Side by side
Best in the row
| Latest fiscal year | ENS FY26 | NVT FY25 |
|---|---|---|
| Size | ||
| Market cap | $6.4B | $21.2B |
| Revenue | $3.8B | $3.9B |
| Free cash flow | $468M | $372M |
| Net income | $294M | $710M |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth | 3.7% | 29.5% |
| 5-year growth | 4.7% | 14.3% |
| Share count change | −5.7% | −2.1% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 29.3% | 37.7% |
| Operating margin | 11.4% | 15.8% |
| Net margin | 7.8% | 18.2% |
| FCF margin | 12.5% | 9.6% |
| Return on capital | 13.7% | 9.3% |
| Return on equity | 15.4% | 20.4% |
| Balance sheet | ||
| Net debt | $674M | $1.3B |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.3x | 1.6x |
| Dividends and buybacks | $409M | $384M |
| Valuation & quality | ||
| P/E | 18.1x | 35.4x |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 6 |
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.