Hubbell holds the cleaner structural position, with the lead spread across growth and stability. Advanced Drainage Systems still leads on profitability and valuation, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. On the market side, Hubbell is in better shape — its trend is intact while Advanced Drainage Systems's trend has broken down. That puts structure and market broadly in agreement — Hubbell's lead looks more confirmed than conflicted.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.
The lead is spread across growth and stability, rather than sitting in one isolated gap.
This comparison is anchored in long-term financial trajectory similarity within the selected peer universe.
The pair sits on a clearly comparable long-term path, though it is not a near-twin match.
Most of the shared profile comes through capital structure and margin trend.
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.
Hubbell Incorporated is stronger, but the price setup still looks more supportive for Advanced Drainage Systems, Inc..
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
The current lead is backed by a stronger multi-year growth trajectory.
Capital efficiency also runs the other way, with a 4.6-point ROIC edge acting as a real counterforce.
The lead is built on both growth and stability — though profitability still provides a counterweight.
Break down the HUBB vs WMS comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how HUBB and WMS 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.