Carlisle Companies holds the cleaner structural position, with valuation as the main driver and growth adding further support. The Weir still leads on growth and stability, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. The market setup is currently leaning toward The Weir, which does not confirm the structural lead. That leaves a split case: the structural lead stays with Carlisle Companies, but the market is not currently confirming it.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.
Most of the lead runs through valuation, while profitability helps make the separation broader.
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.
The clearest structural overlap shows up in investment intensity and margin consistency.
Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.
The largest gaps do not all point in the same direction.
Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.
The Weir Group PLC is cheaper, but Carlisle Companies Incorporated is still stronger.
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 4.8 turns lower.
Growth still leans toward The Weir Group PLC, so the lead is real without reading as one-way.
Valuation settles the comparison, while pricing and growth keep the broader setup from looking fully aligned.
Break down the CSL vs WEIR.L comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how CSL and WEIR.L 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.