The structural profiles are close, with Rockwell Automation carrying a narrow edge on growth. Carlisle Companies still has the edge on valuation, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. On the market side, Rockwell Automation is in better shape — its trend is intact while Carlisle Companies's trend has broken down. That puts structure and market broadly in agreement — Rockwell Automation's lead looks more confirmed than conflicted.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.
Most of the separation is still concentrated in growth.
This comparison is anchored in 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 capital structure and recent revenue growth.
Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.
The clearest separation appears in growth.
Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.
Rockwell Automation, Inc. still looks cheaper, even though Carlisle Companies Incorporated remains structurally stronger.
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
Earnings growth is one contributing factor within the growth lead.
Absolute pricing still looks more supportive for Carlisle Companies, with a forward P/E that is 11.5 turns lower there.
The main read on growth is clearer than the broader score gap.
Break down the CSL vs ROK comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how CSL and ROK 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.
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.