COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
CGNX vs FTV
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. CGNX scored 54.9, FTV scored 58.0 — FTV leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. CGNX's fundamentals are as of July 2026, but FTV's are as of April 2026 — a 3-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
CGNX
Cognex Corporation
54.9
$60.54 · $10.2B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
3.1
FTV leads
FTV
Fortive Corporation
58
$60.41 · $18.2B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestFTV32.0x
- Fastest growthCGNX+17.1%
- Strongest balance sheetCGNX0.04
- Highest qualityCGNX73 / 100
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
CGNX
stronger →← stronger
FTV
73
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
63
79
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
56
29
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
56
CGNX is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
CGNX
FTV
$268mC
FCF
$966mC+
+17.1%B+
Rev
+3.6%C+
0.04A-
D/E
0.59C+
58.2xC
P/E
32.0xB
2.71C
PEG
0.98B+
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
CGNX
FTV
153% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
13% above
~38%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~9%/yr
-68%
1-yr DCF upside
-17%
-60%
5-yr DCF upside
-12%
-48%
10-yr DCF upside
-4%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
CGNX
Why this score
- Raising its dividend
FTV
Why this score
- Buying back stock
The companies
CGNXCognex Corporation
Why now
Scientific & Technical Instruments · market cap $10.2b. 17% off the 52-week high of $72.88. Revenue growing +17%, comfortably above the S&P median. 19 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $80.05 (implying +32% upside).
Moat
Net margin 16% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 11% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 153% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Trailing P/E 58.2x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Beta 1.50 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return.
FTVFortive Corporation
Why now
Scientific & Technical Instruments · market cap $18.2b. 6% off the 52-week high of $64.56. PEG 0.98 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 13 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $64.31 (implying +6% upside).
Moat
FCF converts 194% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Trailing P/E 32x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
Generating verdict… typically 5–10 seconds
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where CGNX and FTV diverge
On the headline score the gap is 3.1 points in favor of FTV. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- ValueCGNX 28.6 · FTV 55.6FTV +27.0
- GrowthCGNX 79.3 · FTV 56.1CGNX +23.2
- QualityCGNX 73.1 · FTV 62.5CGNX +10.6
Pillars run 0–100 against sector peers, so a score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.