COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
HLIO vs VRT
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. HLIO scored 67.8, VRT scored 74.1 — VRT leads.
Compare another set
HLIO
Helios Technologies, Inc.
67.8
$76.18 · $2.5B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
6.3
VRT leads
VRT
Vertiv Holdings Co
74.1
$261.95 · $100.8B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestHLIO35.6x
- Fastest growthVRT+26.2%
- Strongest balance sheetHLIO0.37
- Highest qualityVRT86 / 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)
HLIO
stronger →← stronger
VRT
59
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
86
83
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
91
63
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
52
VRT is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
HLIO
VRT
$107mC
FCF
$2.9bB
+14.0%B+
Rev
+26.2%A-
0.37B+
D/E
0.70B
35.6xC+
P/E
59.1xD
1.03B+
PEG
1.28B
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
HLIO
VRT
67% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
156% above
~20%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~42%/yr
-45%
1-yr DCF upside
-70%
-40%
5-yr DCF upside
-61%
-33%
10-yr DCF upside
-45%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
HLIO
Why this score
- Raising its dividend
VRT
Why this score
- Durable high returns
The companies
HLIOHelios Technologies, Inc.
Why now
Specialty Industrial Machinery · market cap $2.5b. 20% off the 52-week high of $95.05. Revenue growing +14%, comfortably above the S&P median. 6 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $90.17 (implying +18% upside).
Moat
FCF converts 150% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Trailing P/E 36x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates. ROE 8% is below the long-run sustainable threshold of ~10% — capital efficiency would need to improve for the equity base to compound at the market rate.
VRTVertiv Holdings Co
Why now
Electrical Equipment & Parts · market cap $100.8b. Down 31% from 52-week high of $379.94 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +26% — in hypergrowth territory. 26 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $338.15 (implying +29% upside).
Moat
Net margin 15% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 36% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 169% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Trailing P/E 59.1x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Down 31% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Beta 2.08 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return.
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 HLIO and VRT diverge
On the headline score the gap is 6.3 points in favor of VRT. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- QualityHLIO 59.4 · VRT 86.1VRT +26.7
- ValueHLIO 63.1 · VRT 52.0HLIO +11.1
- GrowthHLIO 83.0 · VRT 90.8VRT +7.8
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.