FLS vs. PH

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Flowserve Corporation (FLS) and Parker-Hannifin Corporation (PH).

Performance

FLS vs. PH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Flowserve Corporation (FLS) and Parker-Hannifin Corporation (PH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

FLS vs. PH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLS Flowserve Corporation	6.27%	22.45%	41.88%	37.32%	3.08%	-15.08%	-23.85%	33.66%	-8.20%	-11.19%
PH Parker-Hannifin Corporation	2.04%	39.54%	39.58%	60.81%	-6.91%	18.30%	34.78%	40.75%	-24.00%	44.91%

Fundamentals

Market Cap FLS : $9.44B PH : $114.68B
EPS FLS : $2.65 PH : $27.53
PE Ratio FLS : 27.69 PH : 32.52
PEG Ratio FLS : 0.91 PH : 1.37
PS Ratio FLS : 2.03 PH : 5.62
PB Ratio FLS : 4.31 PH : 7.48
Total Revenue (TTM) FLS : $4.73B PH : $20.46B
Gross Profit (TTM) FLS : $1.62B PH : $7.63B
EBITDA (TTM) FLS : $691.59M PH : $5.26B

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLS achieves a 6.27% return, which is significantly higher than PH's 2.04% return. Over the past 10 years, FLS has underperformed PH with an annualized return of 7.39%, while PH has yielded a comparatively higher 25.06% annualized return.

FLS

• 1D: 6.29%
• 1M: -16.71%
• YTD: 6.27%
• 6M: 39.16%
• 1Y: 52.63%
• 3Y*: 31.49%
• 5Y*: 15.57%
• 10Y*: 7.39%

PH

• 1D: 3.92%
• 1M: -11.29%
• YTD: 2.04%
• 6M: 18.56%
• 1Y: 48.64%
• 3Y*: 40.22%
• 5Y*: 24.76%
• 10Y*: 25.06%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Return for Risk

FLS vs. PH — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

FLS

FLS Risk / Return Rank: 79
FLS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
FLS Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
FLS Omega Ratio Rank: 80
FLS Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
FLS Martin Ratio Rank: 82

PH

PH Risk / Return Rank: 86
PH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
PH Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
PH Omega Ratio Rank: 86
PH Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
PH Martin Ratio Rank: 91

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

FLS vs. PH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Flowserve Corporation (FLS) and Parker-Hannifin Corporation (PH). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	FLS	PH	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.08	1.59	-0.50
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.04	2.19	-0.15
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.33	-0.05
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.14	2.83	-0.68
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	6.50	10.89	-4.39
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FLS vs. PH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLS Sharpe Ratio is 1.08, which is lower than the PH Sharpe Ratio of 1.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLS and PH, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FLS	PH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.08	1.59	-0.50
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.45	0.88	-0.43
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.20	0.80	-0.60
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.25	0.45	-0.19

Correlation

The correlation between FLS and PH is 0.49, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

FLS vs. PH - Dividend Comparison

FLS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.16%, more than PH's 0.80% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FLS Flowserve Corporation	1.16%	1.21%	1.46%	1.94%	2.61%	2.61%	2.17%	1.91%	2.00%	1.35%	1.58%	1.71%
PH Parker-Hannifin Corporation	0.80%	0.80%	1.00%	1.25%	1.73%	1.25%	1.29%	1.65%	1.97%	1.32%	1.80%	2.60%

Drawdowns

FLS vs. PH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLS drawdown since its inception was -77.36%, which is greater than PH's maximum drawdown of -66.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLS and PH.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLS	PH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-77.36%	-66.92%	-10.44%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-24.63%	-17.77%	-6.86%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-43.03%	-28.64%	-14.39%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-64.82%	-54.68%	-10.14%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-19.89%	-12.49%	-7.40%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-27.06%	-15.35%	-11.71%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.13%	4.61%	+3.52%

Volatility

FLS vs. PH - Volatility Comparison

Flowserve Corporation (FLS) has a higher volatility of 14.44% compared to Parker-Hannifin Corporation (PH) at 9.82%. This indicates that FLS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLS	PH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	14.44%	9.82%	+4.62%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	35.40%	17.88%	+17.52%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	48.94%	30.84%	+18.10%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	34.80%	28.31%	+6.49%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	37.10%	31.52%	+5.58%

Financials

FLS vs. PH - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Flowserve Corporation and Parker-Hannifin Corporation over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

FLS - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Flowserve Corporation reported a gross profit of 425.24M and revenue of 1.22B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 34.8%.

PH - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Parker-Hannifin Corporation reported a gross profit of 1.93B and revenue of 5.17B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 37.3%.

FLS - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Flowserve Corporation reported an operating income of 15.88M and revenue of 1.22B, resulting in an operating margin of 1.3%.

PH - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Parker-Hannifin Corporation reported an operating income of 1.09B and revenue of 5.17B, resulting in an operating margin of 21.1%.

FLS - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Flowserve Corporation reported a net income of -29.00M and revenue of 1.22B, resulting in a net margin of -2.4%.

PH - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Parker-Hannifin Corporation reported a net income of 845.00M and revenue of 5.17B, resulting in a net margin of 16.3%.