FLS vs LUD vs GHM Stock Comparison

Flowserve, Luda Technology and Graham Prices as of Oct 26, 2026 Peers: Industry group
FLS Flowserve Corp
$69.54 -5.8% 1M +30.2% 1Y
Market cap
$8.97B
P/E
24.2x
Revenue (TTM)
$4.63B
Div. yield
–
Pumps and Valves Industrials
7 wins
GHM Graham Corp
$68.26 -21.7% 1M +9.4% 1Y
Market cap
$810.34M
P/E
68.6x
Revenue (TTM)
$261.15M
Div. yield
–
Pumps and Valves Industrials
3 wins

Head to Head

10 decided of 12

Flowserve leads on 7 of the 12 questions below (Flowserve 7, Graham 3). Which ones matter depends on what you are buying for; a cheap multiple and slow growth often come together.

QuestionFLSLUDGHMLeader
Larger companyMarket capitalisation $8.97B $86.19M $810.34M FLS
Cheaper on earningsLower P/E, profitable companies only 24.2x 155.0x 68.6x FLS
Cheaper on forward earningsLower price / next fiscal year consensus EPS 16.0x — 41.9x FLS
Faster revenue growthRevenue growth, trailing twelve months -0.3% — +21.2% GHM
More profitableNet margin, trailing twelve months 8.0% — 4.5% FLS
Better return on capitalReturn on invested capital 6.6% — 7.0% GHM
Less leveragedLower net debt / EBITDA 2.9x — — –
Higher dividend yieldTrailing dividend yield 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% –
Better 1-year returnPrice return, last 12 months +30.2% -56.0% +9.4% FLS
Better 5-year returnAnnualised price return, 5 years +14.1%/yr — +39.8%/yr GHM
Less volatileAnnualised volatility, 1 year 48.9% 144.4% 54.5% FLS
Higher overall scoreMean of the five percentile scores vs peers 58/100 — 31/100 FLS

Percentile Scorecard

FLSLUDGHM

Each axis is the mean percentile of its metrics against the company's industry group. 100 is the best in the group, 50 the middle.

Scores by Axis

AxisFLSLUDGHM
Valuation 50 #102 of 203 18 #166 of 203 18 #167 of 203
Growth 69 #58 of 187 – 60 #75 of 187
Profitability 54 #86 of 185 – 32 #126 of 185
Financial Health 34 #146 of 219 40 #132 of 219 37 #138 of 219
Shareholder Returns 85 #24 of 153 – 9 #139 of 153
Overall 58 – 31
  • FLS ranked among 222 companies in Machinery
  • LUD ranked among 222 companies in Machinery
  • GHM ranked among 222 companies in Machinery

Price Performance

Price return, split-adjusted, before dividends. Click a name to hide or show it.

Returns

PeriodFLSLUDGHMSPY
1 month -5.8%-3.0%-21.7% -0.8%
3 months -4.3%-10.8%-34.5% +3.5%
6 months -20.9%-28.8%-27.9% +7.0%
Year to date +0.2%-39.6%+6.3% +12.2%
1 year +30.2%-56.0%+9.4% +13.0%
3 years +94.0%—+342.1% +86.3%
3 years, per year +24.7%—+64.2% +23.1%
5 years +93.1%—+434.1% +68.6%
5 years, per year +14.1%—+39.8% +11.0%
10 years +58.9%—+283.7% +258.0%
10 years, per year +4.7%—+14.4% +13.6%

Risk

MeasureFLSLUDGHMSPY
Volatility, 1Y 48.9%144.4%54.5% 12.7%
Downside volatility, 1Y 42.0%142.1%56.9% 12.7%
Beta vs S&P 500, 1Y 1.761.232.12 1.00
Return / volatility, 1Y 0.62-0.390.17 1.02
Max drawdown, 5Y -39.0%-83.8%-51.9% -25.4%
From 52-week high -24.4%-67.3%-44.9% -1.8%
52-week high $92.04$11.85$123.79 $779.14
52-week low $52.66$3.20$53.56 $631.97

Valuation History

Weekly multiples on trailing twelve-month fundamentals. Negative or extreme readings (a loss year, a collapsed denominator) are left out so the chart stays readable.

MultipleFLSLUDGHM
P/E now vs peer median 23.9xmedian 26.0x 155.0xmedian 26.0x 67.0xmedian 26.0x
P/S now vs peer median 1.9xmedian 1.9x 2.6xmedian 1.9x 3.1xmedian 1.9x
EV/EBITDA now vs peer median 21.0xmedian 14.0x —median 14.0x 33.3xmedian 14.0x
P/FCF now vs peer median 21.5xmedian 21.4x -40.6xmedian 21.4x -130.9xmedian 21.4x
P/B now vs peer median 3.8xmedian 2.2x 4.0xmedian 2.2x 4.2xmedian 2.2x
PEG now vs peer median 1.40median 1.26 —median 1.26 1.00median 1.26

Financial History

Reported figures by fiscal period, placed on the calendar year (or quarter) each period ended in, so companies with different fiscal years line up.

Trailing twelve monthsFLSLUDGHM
Revenue $4.63B – $261.15M
Gross profit $1.57B – $60.83M
Operating income $392.30M – $14.21M
Net income $390.08M – $11.82M
Free cash flow $411.44M – -$6.12M
EPS (diluted) $2.89 – $1.01
Cash & equivalents $731.01M $4.77M $26.95M
Total debt $2.14B $49.69M $13.00M
Shares (diluted) 128.36M 22.24M 11.71M
Enterprise value $5.85B $40.54M $733.97M

All Metrics

58 metrics · best in bold

Bold marks the best reading: the lowest positive value for multiples, leverage and payout, the highest for everything else. The bar under each value is its percentile against that company's own peers. Hover a value for its rank and the peer median.

Valuation

12 metrics
MetricFLSLUDGHM
P/E 23.9x 155.0x 67.0x
P/FCF 21.5x -40.6x -130.9x
P/Operating cash flow 18.1x – 144.4x
P/S 1.9x 2.6x 3.1x
P/B 3.8x 4.0x 4.2x
P/Tangible book 4.5x 4.1x 5.2x
EV/EBITDA 21.0x – 33.3x
EV/EBIT 26.1x – 54.5x
EV/Revenue 2.2x – 3.0x
EV/FCF 24.9x – -126.5x
EV/Operating cash flow 21.0x – 139.6x
PEG (3Y EPS CAGR) 1.40 – 1.00

Growth

14 metrics
MetricFLSLUDGHM
Revenue growth (1Y) -0.3% – 21.2%
Revenue CAGR (3Y) 5.3% – 15.7%
Gross profit growth (1Y) 4.3% – 10.2%
Gross profit CAGR (3Y) 10.8% – 27.1%
Operating income growth (1Y) -22.5% – -16.1%
Operating income CAGR (3Y) 11.5% – 53.2%
Net income growth (1Y) 24.0% – -14.7%
Net income CAGR (3Y) 15.9% – 71.8%
EPS growth (1Y) 30.5% – -19.7%
EPS CAGR (3Y) 17.1% – 66.8%
Operating cash flow growth (1Y) 1.6% – -58.5%
Operating cash flow CAGR (3Y) 81.4% – -38.0%
Free cash flow growth (1Y) 3.1% – 36.6%
Free cash flow CAGR (3Y) 348.1% – -32.7%

Profitability

14 metrics
MetricFLSLUDGHM
Gross margin 33.9% – 23.3%
EBITDA margin 10.5% – 8.9%
Operating margin 8.5% – 5.4%
Pretax margin 11.9% – 5.3%
Net margin 8.0% – 4.5%
FCF margin 8.9% – -2.3%
Operating cash flow margin 10.5% – 2.1%
Return on equity 16.9% – 7.1%
Return on assets 6.5% – 3.4%
Return on invested capital 6.6% – 7.0%
Return on capital employed 8.6% – 7.8%
Asset turnover 0.8x – 0.8x
Cash conversion (OCF / net income) 1.3x – 0.5x
Stock comp / revenue 0.9% – 0.9%

Financial Health

11 metrics
MetricFLSLUDGHM
Debt / assets 33.8% 25.8% –
Debt / equity 0.9x 0.6x –
Net debt / EBITDA 2.9x – –
Debt / FCF 5.2x – –
Liabilities / assets 63.2% 54.8% 47.2%
Equity / assets 36.8% 45.2% 52.8%
Interest coverage 4.6x – –
Current ratio 2.2x 1.6x 1.2x
Quick ratio 1.2x 1.0x 0.9x
Cash ratio 0.5x 0.4x 0.2x
Altman Z-score 3.55 – 4.19

Shareholder Returns

7 metrics
MetricFLSLUDGHM
Dividend yield 1.3% – –
Net buyback yield 2.6% – -6.4%
Shareholder yield 3.8% – -6.4%
Payout ratio (earnings) – – –
Payout ratio (FCF) – – –
Dividend growth (1Y) – – –
Dividend CAGR (3Y) – – –

Analyst Estimates

Solid lines are reported fiscal-year results; dashed lines are the consensus for the years ahead. Hover a year for the analysts' high and low, and how each result compared with its estimate.

ConsensusFLSLUDGHM
Forward P/E 16.0xFY2026 – 41.9xFY2026
EPS, next fiscal year $4.34FY2026 – $1.63FY2026
EPS growth, next FY +19.2%FY2026 – +45.5%FY2026
EPS growth, the year after +12.0% – +41.7%
Revenue, next fiscal year $4.72BFY2026 – $271.48MFY2026
Revenue growth, next FY -0.1%FY2026 – +10.7%FY2026
Revenue growth, the year after +5.3% – +22.0%

Institutional Ownership

13F filings, quarter ended Jun 30, 2026
HoldersFLSLUDGHM
Held by institutions 100.0% – 89.3%
Institutions holding 584 – 222
Change in shares held, QoQ +14.6% – +16.8%
Institutions buying 299 – 145
Institutions selling 201 – 56
Buyers to sellers 1.49 – 2.59

Return Correlation

Daily returns, last 12 months

1.00 means two stocks move in lockstep, 0 that they move independently. Pairs below about 0.5 diversify each other.

FLSLUDGHM
FLS 1.00 0.11 0.35
LUD 0.11 1.00 0.10
GHM 0.35 0.10 1.00

Add a Peer

Largest companies in the same industry

Related Comparisons

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is bigger, FLS, LUD and GHM?

Flowserve (FLS) is the largest by market capitalisation: Flowserve (FLS) $8.97B, Luda Technology (LUD) $86.19M, Graham (GHM) $810.34M.

Which stock is cheaper, FLS, LUD and GHM?

Flowserve (FLS) trades on the lowest price-to-earnings ratio (Flowserve (FLS) 24.2x, Luda Technology (LUD) 155.0x, Graham (GHM) 68.6x). On next year's consensus earnings, Flowserve (FLS) is cheapest (Flowserve (FLS) 16.0x, Graham (GHM) 41.9x). A lower multiple can reflect slower expected growth, so read it next to the growth figures.

Which company is growing faster?

Graham (GHM) grew revenue fastest over the trailing twelve months: Flowserve (FLS) -0.3%, Graham (GHM) +21.2%.

Which company is more profitable?

Flowserve (FLS) has the highest net margin (Flowserve (FLS) 8.0%, Graham (GHM) 4.5%). On return on invested capital, Graham (GHM) leads (Flowserve (FLS) 6.6%, Graham (GHM) 7.0%).

Which stock has performed better?

Over the past year Flowserve (FLS) returned the most: Flowserve (FLS) +30.2%, Luda Technology (LUD) -56.0%, Graham (GHM) +9.4%. Over five years, Graham (GHM) compounded fastest (Flowserve (FLS) +14.1%/yr, Graham (GHM) +39.8%/yr). Returns are price only, before dividends.

Which stock is riskier?

By one-year price volatility, Flowserve (FLS) has been the steadiest (Flowserve (FLS) 48.9%, Luda Technology (LUD) 144.4%, Graham (GHM) 54.5%). Volatility measures how widely the price swings, not the risk of the business.

Which is the better stock, FLS, LUD and GHM?

There is no single answer; it depends on what you are buying for. On the 12 head-to-head measures on this page, Flowserve (FLS) leads on 7. Business Quant does not give investment advice; use the comparison as a starting point for your own research.

Data from SEC filings, exchange prices and consensus estimates, via Business Quant. Percentile scores compare each company with its own peer group, so two companies' scores are each relative to different peers unless you rank against the whole market. Price returns exclude dividends. Nothing on this page is investment advice.