EnerSys vs Woodward
Add, change or remove companies; up to four.
KIRA’s take AI analyst
I put EnerSys and Woodward side by side, using each one’s latest annual report. Here is what stands out:
- EnerSys is the larger business, with $3.8B of revenue in fiscal 2026 against $3.6B for Woodward.
- Woodward grew revenue faster (7.3%, against 3.7%).
- EnerSys turned more of its sales into free cash flow (12.5% FCF margin, against 9.5%).
- Woodward earned a higher return on the capital invested in it (16.8%, against 13.7%).
- Investors pay more for each dollar of Woodward’s earnings: a P/E of 33.8x against 17.8x for EnerSys.
Who comes out ahead
Of the 10 measures where higher (or lower) is clearly better, how many each company leads.
EnerSys
ENS
3/10
Gross marginFCF marginShare count change
Woodward
WWD
7/10
Revenue growth5-year growthNet marginReturn on capitalReturn on equityPiotroski F-scoreNet debt / EBITDA
Side by side
Best in the row
| Latest fiscal year | ENS FY26 | WWD FY25 |
|---|---|---|
| Size | ||
| Market cap | $6.2B | $18.5B |
| Revenue | $3.8B | $3.6B |
| Free cash flow | $468M | $340M |
| Net income | $294M | $442M |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth | 3.7% | 7.3% |
| 5-year growth | 4.7% | 7.4% |
| Share count change | −5.7% | −1.0% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 29.3% | 26.8% |
| Operating margin | 11.4% | — |
| Net margin | 7.8% | 12.4% |
| FCF margin | 12.5% | 9.5% |
| Return on capital | 13.7% | 16.8% |
| Return on equity | 15.4% | 18.6% |
| Balance sheet | ||
| Net debt | $674M | $378M |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.3x | 0.6x |
| Dividends and buybacks | $409M | $238M |
| Valuation & quality | ||
| P/E | 17.8x | 33.8x |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 8 |
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.