Which is better, CTAS or IESC?

On the Buffett-Fit framework, Cintas Corporation (CTAS) currently grades higher than IESC — 67/100 (B grade) vs 51/100 (C). That said, "better" depends on which framework you trust — CTAS wins on Warren Buffett, Benjamin Graham, Philip Fisher, Peter Lynch, Charlie Munger, and Terry Smith; IESC wins on Joel Greenblatt. The full pillar breakdown is on this page.

Should I buy CTAS or IESC?

This page is an educational comparison, not investment advice. Both CTAS and IESC are graded against the same Buffett 5-pillar framework (moat, earnings durability, management quality, financial health, valuation) plus six other documented investor frameworks. Read the side-by-side breakdown to see which one matches the criteria you care about most — and always do your own research before making any investment decision.

Is CTAS better than IESC for value investing?

On the Buffett-style value-investing framework, CTAS currently grades higher — 67/100 vs 51/100, a 16-point gap. The gap is driven by which pillars each stock passes; the table on this page shows moat, durability, management, financial health, and valuation side-by-side.

What's the difference between CTAS and IESC on Warren Buffett's framework?

Both stocks are evaluated on the same five pillars: economic moat (durable competitive advantage), earnings durability (consistent profitability), management quality (capital allocation), financial health (conservative balance sheet), and valuation (margin of safety). CTAS currently scores 67/100 (B grade); IESC scores 51/100 (C grade). The "Where each wins" section on this page breaks down which pillar each stock dominates.

Which has the stronger moat, CTAS or IESC?

Moat strength is one of the five pillars in the Buffett-Fit score on this page. CTAS and IESC are each scored on ROIC sustainability, gross-margin durability, and qualitative signals like brand strength, switching costs, network effects, and regulatory barriers. The pillar breakdown on this page shows the moat sub-score side-by-side so you can see which one has the more durable competitive advantage.

Which is more undervalued, CTAS or IESC?

Valuation is one of the five Buffett-Fit pillars on this page. Both stocks are scored on owner-earnings yield, price-to-intrinsic-value vs the underlying compounding rate, and the margin of safety relative to a conservative DCF. The valuation sub-score in the table below tells you which one currently trades at a more attractive price relative to its underlying business quality.

Are CTAS and IESC both Industrials stocks?

Yes — both Cintas Corporation (CTAS) and IES Holdings, Inc. (IESC) operate in the Industrials sector. That makes this a direct sector-peer comparison, which is the apples-to-apples way to use the Buffett-Fit framework: the score weighs each stock against its sector's specific quality and valuation benchmarks (sector-relative bonus), so the cross-stock comparison isn't distorted by inter-sector base-rate differences.

Is this CTAS vs IESC comparison investment advice?

No. This page is an educational pattern-match against documented public frameworks (Buffett, Graham, Fisher, Lynch, Greenblatt, Munger, Smith), not personalised investment advice. The scores reflect how closely each stock matches each framework's documented criteria — they are not buy/hold/sell recommendations. Always do your own research and consult a licensed financial adviser for personalised advice.

Stock comparison

Cintas

CTAS$67.34BIndustrials Market cap, Sector

IES Holdings

IESC$13.65BIndustrials Market cap, Sector

Overall winner

Cintas

CTAS 61 IESC

Wins on the combined sum of fit scores across all four strategies. Per-strategy breakdown below.

Scored across Buffett, Graham, Lynch and Greenblatt - plus a side-by-side metric table covering valuation, quality, growth and balance sheet.

Fit scores by strategy

CTAS6wins

1winsIESC

Warren Buffett

67C

D51

Benjamin Graham

74B

B70

Philip Fisher

62C

D57

Peter Lynch

58D

D53

Joel Greenblatt

59D

C64

Charlie Munger

70B

D51

Terry Smith

65C

D48

Side-by-side metrics

Metric	CTAS	IESC
Market cap	Winner: $67.34B	$13.65B
P/E (TTM)	Winner: 34.9x	35.9x
EV/EBIT	Winner: 29.7x	35.7x
ROIC (TTM)	23.17%	27.3% Winner
Gross margin	Winner: 50.36%	25.63%
Net margin	Winner: 17.57%	10.47%
Revenue CAGR 5y	9.79%	21.71% Winner
EPS CAGR 5y	14.24%	47.56% Winner
Debt / Equity	0.6x	0.1x Winner
Dividend yield	Winner: 1.07%	0.0%

Where each one wins

The metrics with the biggest gap between the two - sorted so the most decisive edges read first.

CTAS leads on

Dividend yield1.07%vs 0.0%+100%
Market cap$67.34Bvs $13.65B+80%
Gross margin50.36%vs 25.63%+49%
Net margin17.57%vs 10.47%+40%

IESC leads on

Debt / Equity0.1xvs 0.6x+84%
EPS CAGR 5y47.56%vs 14.24%+70%
Revenue CAGR 5y21.71%vs 9.79%+55%
ROIC (TTM)27.3%vs 23.17%+15%

More like CTAS

CTAS vs 6532.T CTAS vs SALIK.AE CTAS vs GPP.WA CTAS vs RAA.DE

More like IESC

IESC vs 6532.T IESC vs SALIK.AE IESC vs GPP.WA IESC vs RAA.DE

Read the full Buffett-Brain analysis for CTAS Read the full Buffett-Brain analysis for IESC

Related on invest-like

Strongest Moat Highest ROIC Warren Buffett strategy Economic Moat

Key terms in this analysis

ROIC Free Cash Flow (FCF)Economic Moat P/E Ratio Margin of Safety Quality Score

Educational tool. Fit scores are deterministic projections from public financials onto each investor's published criteria - not personal recommendations or advice.

Stock comparison

Cintas

CTAS$67.34BIndustrials Market cap, Sector

IES Holdings

IESC$13.65BIndustrials Market cap, Sector

Overall winner

Cintas

CTAS 61 IESC

Wins on the combined sum of fit scores across all four strategies. Per-strategy breakdown below.

Scored across Buffett, Graham, Lynch and Greenblatt - plus a side-by-side metric table covering valuation, quality, growth and balance sheet.

Fit scores by strategy

CTAS6wins

1winsIESC

Warren Buffett

67C

D51

Benjamin Graham

74B

B70

Philip Fisher

62C

D57

Peter Lynch

58D

D53

Joel Greenblatt

59D

C64

Charlie Munger

70B

D51

Terry Smith

65C

D48

Side-by-side metrics

Metric	CTAS	IESC
Market cap	Winner: $67.34B	$13.65B
P/E (TTM)	Winner: 34.9x	35.9x
EV/EBIT	Winner: 29.7x	35.7x
ROIC (TTM)	23.17%	27.3% Winner
Gross margin	Winner: 50.36%	25.63%
Net margin	Winner: 17.57%	10.47%
Revenue CAGR 5y	9.79%	21.71% Winner
EPS CAGR 5y	14.24%	47.56% Winner
Debt / Equity	0.6x	0.1x Winner
Dividend yield	Winner: 1.07%	0.0%

Where each one wins

The metrics with the biggest gap between the two - sorted so the most decisive edges read first.

CTAS leads on

Dividend yield1.07%vs 0.0%+100%
Market cap$67.34Bvs $13.65B+80%
Gross margin50.36%vs 25.63%+49%
Net margin17.57%vs 10.47%+40%

IESC leads on

Debt / Equity0.1xvs 0.6x+84%
EPS CAGR 5y47.56%vs 14.24%+70%
Revenue CAGR 5y21.71%vs 9.79%+55%
ROIC (TTM)27.3%vs 23.17%+15%

More like CTAS

CTAS vs 6532.T CTAS vs SALIK.AE CTAS vs GPP.WA CTAS vs RAA.DE

More like IESC

IESC vs 6532.T IESC vs SALIK.AE IESC vs GPP.WA IESC vs RAA.DE

Read the full Buffett-Brain analysis for CTAS Read the full Buffett-Brain analysis for IESC

Related on invest-like

Strongest Moat Highest ROIC Warren Buffett strategy Economic Moat

Key terms in this analysis

ROIC Free Cash Flow (FCF)Economic Moat P/E Ratio Margin of Safety Quality Score

Educational tool. Fit scores are deterministic projections from public financials onto each investor's published criteria - not personal recommendations or advice.