Home > Comparison > Industrials > HWM vs IR
The strategic rivalry between Howmet Aerospace Inc. and Ingersoll Rand Inc. shapes the industrial machinery sector’s evolution. Howmet Aerospace operates as a capital-intensive aerospace components manufacturer with diversified engineered solutions. In contrast, Ingersoll Rand focuses on mission-critical air and fluid technologies with a broad industrial technology and services model. This analysis will clarify which company’s business trajectory offers superior risk-adjusted returns for a diversified industrial portfolio.
Table of contents
Companies Overview
Howmet Aerospace and Ingersoll Rand stand as pivotal players in the industrial machinery sector with distinct global footprints.
Howmet Aerospace Inc.: Advanced Engineering for Aerospace & Transportation
Howmet Aerospace commands a leading position in engineered solutions for aerospace and transportation. Its revenue stems from four segments: Engine Products, Fastening Systems, Engineered Structures, and Forged Wheels. In 2026, Howmet focuses on expanding its aerospace components portfolio, leveraging advanced materials and manufacturing precision to strengthen its competitive edge.
Ingersoll Rand Inc.: Mission-Critical Industrial Technologies
Ingersoll Rand drives revenue through two core segments: Industrial Technologies and Services, and Precision and Science Technologies. It specializes in air compression, fluid transfer, and precision pumps for critical applications across diverse industries. The company’s 2026 strategy centers on innovation in energy efficiency and expanding its integrated sales network worldwide.
Strategic Collision: Similarities & Divergences
Both companies operate in industrial machinery but diverge sharply in business philosophy: Howmet emphasizes specialized aerospace manufacturing, while Ingersoll Rand pursues broad industrial technology solutions. They compete primarily in advanced engineered products and industrial equipment markets. Their investment profiles contrast—Howmet bets on aerospace innovation, Ingersoll Rand on diversified industrial service growth.
Income Statement Comparison
This data dissects the core profitability and scalability of both corporate engines to reveal who dominates the bottom line:
| Metric | Howmet Aerospace Inc. (HWM) | Ingersoll Rand Inc. (IR) |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | 8.25B | 7.65B |
| Cost of Revenue | 5.72B | 4.70B |
| Operating Expenses | 407M | 1.53B |
| Gross Profit | 2.54B | 2.95B |
| EBITDA | 2.41B | 1.92B |
| EBIT | 2.13B | 1.42B |
| Interest Expense | 151M | 254M |
| Net Income | 1.51B | 581M |
| EPS | 3.73 | 1.46 |
| Fiscal Year | 2025 | 2025 |
Income Statement Analysis: The Bottom-Line Duel
This income statement comparison reveals which company operates with superior efficiency and delivers stronger profitability in a competitive environment.
Howmet Aerospace Inc. Analysis
Howmet Aerospace’s revenue surged from 5B in 2021 to 8.25B in 2025, with net income rising fivefold to 1.5B. Its gross margin of 30.7% and net margin of 18.3% demonstrate robust profitability. In 2025, Howmet accelerated its EBIT by 36%, signaling strong operational momentum and disciplined cost control.
Ingersoll Rand Inc. Analysis
Ingersoll Rand’s revenue grew from 5.15B in 2021 to 7.65B in 2025, though net income rose modestly to 581M. The company maintains a higher gross margin of 38.5% but a lower net margin of 7.6%. In 2025, EBIT increased by 5.4%, but net margin compressed, reflecting challenges in converting top-line gains into bottom-line growth.
Margin Strength vs. Earnings Momentum
Howmet Aerospace outpaces Ingersoll Rand in net income growth and margin expansion, showcasing superior capital allocation and operational leverage. While Ingersoll Rand boasts a stronger gross margin, its weaker net margin and slower earnings growth highlight efficiency constraints. For investors, Howmet’s profile offers a more compelling blend of growth and profitability.
Financial Ratios Comparison
These vital ratios act as a diagnostic tool to expose the underlying fiscal health, valuation premiums, and capital efficiency of the companies compared below:
| Ratios | Howmet Aerospace Inc. (HWM) | Ingersoll Rand Inc. (IR) |
|---|---|---|
| ROE | 28.17% | 5.76% |
| ROIC | 18.19% | 6.36% |
| P/E | 54.93 | 54.24 |
| P/B | 15.47 | 3.13 |
| Current Ratio | 2.13 | 2.06 |
| Quick Ratio | 1.09 | 1.49 |
| D/E | 0.57 | 0.47 |
| Debt-to-Assets | 27.28% | 26.15% |
| Interest Coverage | 14.11 | 5.58 |
| Asset Turnover | 0.74 | 0.42 |
| Fixed Asset Turnover | 3.18 | 8.22 |
| Payout ratio | 12.00% | 5.47% |
| Dividend yield | 0.22% | 0.10% |
| Fiscal Year | 2025 | 2025 |
Efficiency & Valuation Duel: The Vital Signs
Financial ratios serve as a company’s DNA, revealing hidden risks and operational excellence behind headline figures.
Howmet Aerospace Inc.
Howmet Aerospace posts a strong 28.2% ROE and robust 18.3% net margin, signaling operational efficiency. However, its elevated P/E of 54.9 and P/B of 15.5 indicate a stretched valuation. Shareholder returns remain modest at a 0.22% dividend yield, reflecting reinvestment into growth and R&D to sustain competitive advantage.
Ingersoll Rand Inc.
Ingersoll Rand shows a modest 5.8% ROE and a 7.6% net margin, pointing to less efficient profitability. It trades at a similarly high P/E of 54.2 but with a lower P/B of 3.1, suggesting some valuation support. Dividend yield is minimal at 0.1%, with capital likely directed toward operational improvements and moderate growth initiatives.
Premium Valuation vs. Operational Safety
Howmet Aerospace offers superior profitability and operational metrics but at a premium valuation, implying higher risk. Ingersoll Rand trades cheaper relative to book but lags in return metrics, suggesting a more conservative growth profile. Investors seeking growth with operational strength may favor Howmet, while those prioritizing valuation safety might lean toward Ingersoll Rand.
Which one offers the Superior Shareholder Reward?
I observe Howmet Aerospace Inc. (HWM) pays a modest dividend yield near 0.22%, with a stable payout ratio around 12%. Its free cash flow covers dividends nearly 3x, signaling sustainable distributions. Buybacks appear less emphasized. Ingersoll Rand Inc. (IR) offers a lower yield near 0.10%, with a conservative payout ratio around 5%, but it aggressively converts free cash flow to buybacks and dividends, aiming for higher total returns. IR’s stronger buyback intensity and conservative payout ratio suggest a more flexible capital allocation. Considering sustainability and total shareholder return, I find IR’s distribution model superior for 2026 investors seeking balanced income and growth.
Comparative Score Analysis: The Strategic Profile
The radar chart reveals the fundamental DNA and trade-offs of Howmet Aerospace Inc. and Ingersoll Rand Inc., highlighting their financial strengths and weaknesses:
Howmet Aerospace leads with superior ROE (5 vs. 2) and ROA (5 vs. 3), signaling more efficient profit generation and asset utilization. Both firms share weak debt-to-equity scores (2), indicating moderate leverage risk. Ingersoll Rand edges Howmet on DCF (3 vs. 2) and price-to-book valuation (2 vs. 1), suggesting slightly better market pricing. Howmet’s profile is sharper but less balanced, relying heavily on operational efficiency, while Ingersoll Rand shows a more moderate, diversified positioning.
Bankruptcy Risk: Solvency Showdown
Howmet’s Altman Z-Score of 12.43 vastly exceeds Ingersoll Rand’s 3.93, both safely above the distress threshold, but indicating a dominant solvency advantage for Howmet Aerospace:
Financial Health: Quality of Operations
Howmet Aerospace’s Piotroski F-Score of 8 signals very strong financial health, outperforming Ingersoll Rand’s average score of 6, which raises mild concerns about operational robustness:
How are the two companies positioned?
This section dissects the operational DNA of Howmet Aerospace and Ingersoll Rand by comparing their revenue distribution and internal dynamics. The goal is to confront their economic moats to reveal which model sustains the strongest competitive advantage today.
Revenue Segmentation: The Strategic Mix
The following visual comparison dissects how Howmet Aerospace Inc. and Ingersoll Rand Inc. diversify their income streams and where their primary sector bets lie:
Howmet Aerospace anchors revenue with a dominant $4.3B Engine Products Segment and a secondary $1.7B Fastening Systems stream, revealing moderate diversification. Ingersoll Rand pivots around a $5.8B Industrial Technologies and Services Segment, supplemented by $1.4B in Precision and Science Technologies, showing a slightly broader base. Howmet’s concentration in aerospace components implies infrastructure dominance but higher sector risk, while Ingersoll Rand’s spread reduces vulnerability to a single market shock.
Strengths and Weaknesses Comparison
This table compares the Strengths and Weaknesses of Howmet Aerospace Inc. and Ingersoll Rand Inc.:
Howmet Aerospace Inc. Strengths
- Higher net margin and ROE indicate stronger profitability
- Favorable current and quick ratios suggest solid liquidity
- Low debt-to-assets and strong interest coverage improve financial stability
- Diverse product segments with growing Engine Products segment
- Significant revenue base in United States with broad geographic exposure
Ingersoll Rand Inc. Strengths
- Favorable current and quick ratios imply good liquidity
- Low debt-to-assets and positive interest coverage support creditworthiness
- Strong fixed asset turnover shows efficient asset use
- Balanced revenue across Americas, Asia Pacific, and EMEA regions
- Presence in multiple industrial segments enhances market reach
Howmet Aerospace Inc. Weaknesses
- High P/E and P/B ratios suggest potentially overvalued stock
- Low dividend yield may deter income-focused investors
- Asset turnover is neutral, indicating moderate efficiency
- Product segment Fastening Systems smaller compared to Engines
- Geographic reliance on United States more pronounced
Ingersoll Rand Inc. Weaknesses
- Lower net margin and ROE reflect weaker profitability
- Unfavorable asset turnover points to less efficient asset use
- P/E and P/B ratios also unfavorable, indicating valuation concerns
- Minimal dividend yield limits income appeal
- Revenue concentration in Americas region may reduce diversification
Howmet Aerospace shows robust profitability and liquidity with some valuation risks and geographic concentration. Ingersoll Rand exhibits solid liquidity and asset efficiency in fixed assets but faces profitability and valuation challenges alongside less diversification. Both companies’ financial profiles suggest strategic emphasis on balancing growth and operational efficiency.
The Moat Duel: Analyzing Competitive Defensibility
A structural moat is the only reliable shield protecting long-term profits from relentless competitive erosion. Let’s dissect the core moats of two industrial giants:
Howmet Aerospace Inc.: Precision Engineering and Scale Moat
Howmet’s competitive edge stems from its advanced engineered aerospace solutions and scale advantages. This moat shows in its high 25.8% EBIT margin and a robust, growing ROIC well above WACC. New aerospace programs and global expansion in 2026 could deepen this advantage.
Ingersoll Rand Inc.: Diversified Industrial Solutions Moat
Ingersoll Rand leans on product diversification and aftermarket services for competitive defense. Its moat is weaker than Howmet’s, reflected by a lower 18.5% EBIT margin and ROIC below WACC despite improving trends. Expanding energy and medical tech markets may offer modest moat reinforcement.
Moat Strength: Engineering Precision vs. Industrial Diversification
Howmet Aerospace possesses a deeper, more sustainable moat, driven by superior capital efficiency and margin stability. Its scale and innovation better defend market share against competitive threats than Ingersoll Rand’s broader but less profitable moat.
Which stock offers better returns?
The past year saw Howmet Aerospace Inc. surge with strong price acceleration, while Ingersoll Rand Inc. posted moderate gains amid steady upward momentum.
Trend Comparison
Howmet Aerospace’s stock jumped 267.42% over 12 months, showing a bullish trend with accelerating gains and a high volatility of 48.78%. Its price ranged from 63.41 to 250.21.
Ingersoll Rand’s stock rose 3.99% over the same period, reflecting a mild bullish trend with acceleration but lower volatility at 8.19%. Prices moved between 69.7 and 104.17.
Howmet Aerospace’s performance significantly outpaced Ingersoll Rand’s, delivering substantially higher returns and stronger price momentum throughout the year.
Target Prices
Analysts provide a bullish consensus for Howmet Aerospace Inc. and Ingersoll Rand Inc., reflecting optimism about their industrial machinery growth.
| Company | Target Low | Target High | Consensus |
|---|---|---|---|
| Howmet Aerospace Inc. | 209 | 290 | 259.63 |
| Ingersoll Rand Inc. | 87 | 100 | 93 |
Howmet Aerospace’s target consensus at $259.63 exceeds its current $250.21 price, suggesting moderate upside. Ingersoll Rand’s consensus of $93 sits slightly below its current price of $98.52, signaling potential near-term valuation pressure.
Don’t Let Luck Decide Your Entry Point
Optimize your entry points with our advanced ProRealTime indicators. You’ll get efficient buy signals with precise price targets for maximum performance. Start outperforming now!
How do institutions grade them?
The following tables present recent institutional grades for Howmet Aerospace Inc. and Ingersoll Rand Inc.:
Howmet Aerospace Inc. Grades
This table shows recent grades and rating actions from major financial institutions for Howmet Aerospace Inc.
| Grading Company | Action | New Grade | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Susquehanna | maintain | Positive | 2026-02-13 |
| Citigroup | maintain | Buy | 2026-01-13 |
| B of A Securities | maintain | Buy | 2025-11-14 |
| JP Morgan | maintain | Overweight | 2025-11-10 |
| BTIG | maintain | Buy | 2025-11-03 |
| Goldman Sachs | maintain | Buy | 2025-11-03 |
| TD Cowen | maintain | Buy | 2025-10-31 |
| RBC Capital | maintain | Outperform | 2025-10-31 |
| UBS | maintain | Neutral | 2025-10-31 |
| Truist Securities | maintain | Buy | 2025-10-15 |
Ingersoll Rand Inc. Grades
This table shows recent grades and rating actions from major financial institutions for Ingersoll Rand Inc.
| Grading Company | Action | New Grade | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stifel | maintain | Hold | 2026-01-23 |
| Citigroup | maintain | Buy | 2026-01-12 |
| Wells Fargo | maintain | Overweight | 2026-01-07 |
| Stifel | maintain | Hold | 2025-12-16 |
| Citigroup | maintain | Buy | 2025-12-08 |
| Citigroup | maintain | Buy | 2025-11-03 |
| Baird | maintain | Outperform | 2025-11-03 |
| Stifel | maintain | Hold | 2025-10-20 |
| Wells Fargo | maintain | Overweight | 2025-10-06 |
| Morgan Stanley | maintain | Equal Weight | 2025-08-13 |
Which company has the best grades?
Howmet Aerospace consistently receives stronger grades like Buy and Outperform compared to Ingersoll Rand’s mix of Hold and Buy ratings. This suggests higher institutional confidence in Howmet’s near-term prospects, potentially influencing investor sentiment more positively.
Risks specific to each company
The following categories identify critical pressure points and systemic threats facing Howmet Aerospace Inc. and Ingersoll Rand Inc. in the 2026 market environment:
1. Market & Competition
Howmet Aerospace Inc.
- Operates in aerospace and transportation with strong segments but faces high-tech competition globally.
Ingersoll Rand Inc.
- Serves diverse industrial markets; faces intense competition in air and fluid technologies.
2. Capital Structure & Debt
Howmet Aerospace Inc.
- Moderate leverage (D/E 0.57); strong interest coverage at 14.11x mitigates debt risk.
Ingersoll Rand Inc.
- Slightly lower leverage (D/E 0.47) but weaker interest coverage at 5.58x increases refinancing risk.
3. Stock Volatility
Howmet Aerospace Inc.
- Beta 1.25 indicates moderate sensitivity to market swings.
Ingersoll Rand Inc.
- Higher beta of 1.31 suggests more pronounced volatility and risk.
4. Regulatory & Legal
Howmet Aerospace Inc.
- Aerospace sector exposed to strict safety and export controls.
Ingersoll Rand Inc.
- Industrial machinery faces regulatory scrutiny on emissions and safety standards.
5. Supply Chain & Operations
Howmet Aerospace Inc.
- Global footprint in key aerospace hubs increases complexity and risk of disruption.
Ingersoll Rand Inc.
- Broad, multi-industry supply chains raise operational risks amid geopolitical tensions.
6. ESG & Climate Transition
Howmet Aerospace Inc.
- Pressure to reduce aerospace emissions; invests in advanced engineered solutions.
Ingersoll Rand Inc.
- Faces challenges in energy efficiency and sustainability across diverse product lines.
7. Geopolitical Exposure
Howmet Aerospace Inc.
- Operates in many countries including China and Europe, exposing it to trade and tariff risks.
Ingersoll Rand Inc.
- Presence in Europe, Middle East, and Asia exposes it to geopolitical and supply chain risks.
Which company shows a better risk-adjusted profile?
Howmet Aerospace’s strongest risk is market competition and technological disruption but benefits from superior financial health and lower refinancing risk. Ingersoll Rand’s major risk lies in weaker profitability and higher operational complexity. Howmet’s Altman Z-Score of 12.4 versus Ingersoll Rand’s 3.9 confirms greater financial stability. Despite Howmet’s higher valuation multiples, its robust return on equity (28.2%) and interest coverage (14.1x) justify a safer risk-adjusted profile. The recent surge in Howmet’s stock price near its 52-week high contrasts with Ingersoll Rand’s more volatile performance, underscoring Howmet’s relative resilience. I favor Howmet for disciplined capital allocation and stronger balance sheet in this challenging industrial cycle.
Final Verdict: Which stock to choose?
Howmet Aerospace Inc. (HWM) stands out with its superpower of consistently creating value through a rapidly growing ROIC well above its cost of capital. Its robust profitability and efficient capital allocation make it a cash machine in aerospace manufacturing. A point of vigilance is its rich valuation, which could temper upside. HWM fits well in aggressive growth portfolios.
Ingersoll Rand Inc. (IR) leverages a strategic moat rooted in stable industrial equipment demand and recurring cash flow. While its profitability metrics lag HWM’s, IR offers a safer balance sheet with a favorable debt profile and steady free cash flow yield. It suits portfolios seeking Growth at a Reasonable Price (GARP) with moderate volatility.
If you prioritize high-growth and value creation backed by a widening competitive advantage, Howmet Aerospace outshines with superior returns and accelerating momentum. However, if you seek a more stable industrial play with consistent cash flow and lower financial risk, Ingersoll Rand offers better stability despite slower profit growth. Each appeals to distinct investor profiles with differing risk appetites.
Disclaimer: Investment carries a risk of loss of initial capital. The past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results. Be sure to understand risks before making an investment decision.
Go Further
I encourage you to read the complete analyses of Howmet Aerospace Inc. and Ingersoll Rand Inc. to enhance your investment decisions:
