Looking up the ticker with the regulator···
0s · usually 20–30 seconds for a cold read
Looking up the ticker with the regulator···
0s · usually 20–30 seconds for a cold read
Illinois Tool Works Inc.
Rule-based classification of fundamentals against the sector. Not a price forecast and not investment advice.
Signals scattered
Get notified when we ship meaningful updates. No spam, no daily noise.
2 of 5 met · composite in line with peers
Business quality, valuation against the sector, and position in the 52-week range — whether they line up or not.
Stable quality
Profitability
3/4
Debt & liquidity
2/3
Efficiency
1/2
Capital returns at Illinois Tool Works Inc. run well ahead of the sector: ROE of 93.7% sits +177% above the sector median, and ROIC of 36.8% exceeds the median by +104%, a combination that reflects the company's disciplined, high-margin industrial model. Revenue growth YoY of 0.9%, however, trails the sector median of 4.3% by -79% — the business converts capital well but is not expanding the top line at pace with peers. That slow growth makes the P/B of 26.3× — +228% above the sector median of 8.0× — a meaningful ask; the market is pricing quality, not momentum. The F-Score of 6/9 and Debt/EBITDA of 1.5×, which sits -36% below the sector median, point to a stable balance sheet. Consensus and the realized three-year EPS CAGR of {{value:eps_cagr_3y}} are broadly aligned, yet the forward PEG reads stretched — the market models growth that the recent record has not yet delivered.
| Ticker | Name | F-Score | ROE | Revenue YoY | Op. margin |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BA | Boeing | 6/9 | 289% | +34% |
Quarter-by-quarter classification · a retrospective read by the current logic · not a price forecast
Rule-based classification of fundamentals against the sector. Not a price forecast and not investment advice. The method did not see these quarters in real time; this is the current logic applied to past reports.
When ITW reports on October 22, 2026, focus on whether revenue growth YoY — currently 4.29%, well below the sector median — shows any acceleration. Also check whether the F-Score profitability block, currently 3/4, holds or slips, particularly the gross margin and asset productivity signals.
ITW carries a Debt/EBITDA of 2.29×, 36% below the sector median, yet its P/B of 8.03× sits 3.3× above it. In the 10-K, read the Management Discussion section for how the company deploys that balance-sheet capacity — share buybacks, dividends, or reinvestment — and whether that explains the valuation gap.
From the same-sector table in section 06, pick two or three companies and line up one metric — ROIC, Debt/EBITDA, or P/B — against ITW's figures of 18.0%, 2.29×, and 8.03× respectively. The table is alphabetical with no ranking, so the selection and the framing of any gap is yours to make.
Steps you can check yourself, based on the figures in this brief.
Piotroski F-Score: nine binary tests of financial strength from the annual report. A ✓ marks a test passed, a dot (·) a test failed.
Over 4 years: -14%+59%-8%-5%
Over 4 years: 1.521.471.381.47
Over 4 years: +10%+1%-1%+1%
The context on the right shows how each figure compares with the sector median. The trend below tracks the change over recent fiscal years.
Beat consensus in 8 of 8 recent quarters — the company clears estimates regularly (consensus is often set conservatively).
Last quarter's EPS against consensus, plus the estimated date of the next report.
| 5% |
| CAT | Caterpillar | 6/9 | 44% | +4% | 16% |
| CSX | CSX | 4/9 | 23% | -3% | 32% |
| DE | Deere | 5/9 | 21% | -12% | — |
| EMR | Emerson Electric | 7/9 | 11% | +3% | — |
| ETN | Eaton | 6/9 | 22% | +10% | — |
| GD | General Dynamics | 8/9 | 18% | +10% | 10% |
| GE | GE Aerospace | 5/9 | 46% | +18% | — |
| HON | Honeywell | 6/9 | 29% | +8% | 22% |
| ITW | Illinois Tool Works Inc. | 6/9 | 94% | +1% | 26% |
| LMT | Lockheed Martin | 6/9 | 77% | +6% | 10% |
| MMM | 3M | 5/9 | 76% | +2% | 19% |
| RTX | RTX | 7/9 | 11% | +10% | 10% |
| UNP | Union Pacific | 7/9 | 40% | +1% | 40% |
| UPS | UPS | 4/9 | 34% | -3% | 9% |
A sample of 15 companies in the sector including the target, alphabetical, unranked. Data from the latest SEC annual reports.
Rule-based classification of fundamentals against the sector. Not a price forecast and not investment advice.
A simplified retrospective read: no analyst forecast (not available historically); the source is the annual report as of the date, so neighbouring quarters can rest on the same data. Quarters with the same classification in a row are merged into one row — each row is one change in the read, not a separate quarter. One ticker is an illustration of the classification logic, not statistics. How we calculate →