TT vs UPS
Valuation
Profitability
Growth
Financial Health
Dividends
AI Verdict
Trane Technologies (TT) trades at a premium valuation with strong profitability and consistent earnings execution, outperforming peers on ROE and margin discipline despite elevated multiples. The company has delivered 21 of the last 25 quarters beating EPS estimates, with a 5-year return of +193.4%, reflecting durable shareholder value creation amid resilient HVAC demand and operational efficiency. While insider selling raises minor concerns, robust analyst conviction (18 analysts, Buy rating) and a healthy balance sheet support continued outperformance. TT’s growth trajectory and capital allocation discipline position it favorably within the industrials sector, particularly against lower-growth peers like 3M and underperforming Lockheed Martin.
UPS exhibits strong operational health with a Piotroski F-Score of 7/9, yet it faces significant valuation and sustainability headwinds. The stock is currently trading at a premium ($108.24) relative to both its Graham Number ($53.11) and Intrinsic Value ($91.18). While the 6.06% dividend yield is attractive, the 100% payout ratio is a critical red flag indicating a lack of cushion for earnings volatility. Negative revenue growth (-3.20%) suggests a struggle for organic expansion, though efficiency gains have kept earnings slightly positive.
Compare Another Pair
TT vs UPS: Head-to-Head Comparison
This page compares Trane Technologies plc (TT) and United Parcel Service, Inc. (UPS) across key fundamental metrics including valuation ratios, profitability margins, growth rates, financial health indicators, and dividend metrics. Each metric highlights the better-performing stock so you can quickly identify relative strengths and weaknesses.
Our AI engine independently analyzes each company's financials, competitive position, and market conditions to produce a verdict (Bullish, Neutral, or Bearish) along with key strengths and risks. Use this comparison alongside your own research to make informed investment decisions.