Donaldson Company leads structurally, with valuation as the clearest single gap between the two profiles. Addtech AB (publ.) still has the edge on growth, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. The market setup is currently leaning toward Addtech AB (publ.), which does not confirm the structural lead. That leaves a split case: the structural lead stays with Donaldson Company, but the market is not currently confirming it.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels. Peer scores are normalised within each company's primary universe (ADDT-B.ST: STOXX 600, DCI: Russell 1000).
Most of the separation is still concentrated in valuation. The overall score gap is 8 points in favour of Donaldson Company, Inc..
These two companies are linked by measured long-term financial trajectory similarity within the selected peer universe.
A solid similarity means the pair shares a clearly comparable long-term financial profile, even if individual dimensions still differ.
Most of the shared profile comes through margin consistency and capital structure.
Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.
Pricing shapes this comparison more than a broad operating gap.
Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.
Structure stays fairly close here, while current pricing still looks more supportive for Donaldson Company, Inc..
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
The multiple-based pricing edge comes from a forward P/E that is 21 turns lower.
Growth still leans toward Addtech AB (publ.), so the lead is real without reading as one-way.
The valuation edge is decisive, even though current pricing and growth still lean somewhat toward Addtech AB (publ.).
Break down the ADDT-B.ST vs DCI comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how ADDT-B.ST and DCI each compare against other companies in their peer groups.
Rule-based, descriptive analysis only. Derived from peer percentile dimensions. Not investment advice. Peer groups are determined algorithmically based on structural similarity — not by sector classification alone.
AssetNext scores reflect each company's structural position within its functional peer group — not a ranking against all stocks simultaneously. Peers are identified by similarity across eight financial dimensions, including revenue growth trajectory, margin structure, capital intensity, and earnings stability. A score of 75 means the company ranks in the top quartile within its own peer group, not the entire market.
Four dimension scores drive the overall peer score: Growth (revenue trajectory and expansion dynamics), Quality (margin structure and capital efficiency), Valuation (peer-relative pricing on standard multiples), and Stability (earnings consistency and financial predictability). Each dimension is scored 0–100 relative to the peer group, then combined into an overall peer score using equal weighting.
Because scores are peer-relative, the same company can have slightly different scores in different index universes. On comparison pages, both companies are shown within their shared peer universe wherever possible — so the scores are directly comparable. The peer basis is stated on each score card.
Scores are recalculated periodically as underlying financial data is updated. All analysis is descriptive and rule-based — AssetNext describes structural realities and never issues buy, sell or hold recommendations.