COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
VRT vs WTS
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. VRT scored 74.1, WTS scored 54.9 — VRT leads.
Compare another set
VRT
Vertiv Holdings Co
74.1
$261.95 · $100.8B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
19.2
VRT leads
WTS
Watts Water Technologies, Inc.
54.9
$375.57 · $12.5B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestWTS32.8x
- Fastest growthVRT+26.2%
- Strongest balance sheetWTS0.10
- 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)
VRT
stronger →← stronger
WTS
86
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
81
91
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
87
52
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
23
VRT is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
VRT
WTS
$2.9bB
FCF
$349mC
+26.2%A-
Rev
+17.1%B+
0.70B
D/E
0.10A
59.1xD
P/E
32.8xB
1.28B
PEG
3.83D
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
VRT
WTS
156% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
133% above
~42%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~29%/yr
-70%
1-yr DCF upside
-60%
-61%
5-yr DCF upside
-57%
-45%
10-yr DCF upside
-52%
These two disagree on this pair: the Value pillar ranks cheapness against sector peers, while price-vs-fair-value is an absolute read. A name can be the better value in its sector and still the dearer one on cash flows.
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
VRT
Why this score
- Durable high returns
WTS
Why this score
- Raising its dividend
- Durable high returns
The companies
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.
WTSWatts Water Technologies, Inc.
Why now
Specialty Industrial Machinery · market cap $12.5b. 5% off the 52-week high of $394.54. Revenue growing +17%, comfortably above the S&P median. 9 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $393.00 (implying +5% upside).
Moat
Net margin 14% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 18% sits above Buffett's preferred 15% threshold — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately.
Risk
Trailing P/E 33x 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 VRT and WTS diverge
On the headline score the gap is 19.2 points in favor of VRT. The widest single difference is Value, where VRT leads by 28.5 points.
- ValueVRT 52.0 · WTS 23.5VRT +28.5
- QualityVRT 86.1 · WTS 80.7VRT +5.4
- GrowthVRT 90.8 · WTS 87.5VRT +3.3
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.