Home Compare OTIS vs SAND.ST
Stock Comparison · Industry comparison · Specialty Industrial Machinery

Otis Worldwide vs Sandvik AB (publ): Which Stock Looks Stronger in 2026?

Otis Worldwide holds the cleaner structural position, with the lead spread across profitability and growth. Sandvik AB (publ) still has the edge on growth, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. In the market, Sandvik AB (publ) carries the stronger setup — intact trend against Otis Worldwide's broken trend. That leaves a split case: the structural lead stays with Otis Worldwide, 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 (OTIS: S&P 500, SAND.ST: STOXX 600).

Updated 2026-08-16

The clearest separation starts in profitability, but valuation adds another real layer to the result. Otis Worldwide Corporation leads by 19 points on the overall comparison score.

INDUSTRY COMPARISON

Both operate in: Specialty Industrial Machinery

This comparison is based on industry proximity, not on functional trajectory similarity. OTIS and SAND.ST share the same industry classification.

For a similarity-based comparison, see how Otis Worldwide and Sandvik AB (publ) each position within their functional peer groups in AssetNext.

Peer-Relative Score
OTIS
Otis Worldwide Corporation
74
Peer-Score
Signal qualitylow
Peer basis: S&P 500
vs
SAND.ST
Sandvik AB (publ)
55
Peer-Score
Signal qualitylow
Peer basis: STOXX 600

Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.

The largest gaps do not all point in the same direction.

Dimension spread: OTIS vs SAND.ST Profitability 85 40 Stability 63 45 Valuation 84 53 Growth 54 92 OTIS SAND.ST
Gap Ranking
#1 Profitability +45
#2 Growth +38
#3 Valuation +31
#4 Stability +18
Price Setup

Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.

Price setup map for OTIS and SAND.ST Stronger + cheaper Stronger + richer Weaker + cheaper Weaker + richer OTISSAND.ST Relative valuation Structural strength

Otis Worldwide Corporation looks stronger on relative valuation, while the broader price setup remains mixed.

Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.

Entry today — historical context

Where OTIS and SAND.ST each sit in their own 5-year price and valuation history.

BASED ON 5-YEAR HISTORY OTIS Lower · below norm 0th 50th 100th 76 pct gap SAND.ST Elevated · above norm 0th 50th 100th 16th 92nd
Today OTIS sits in the lower portion of its own 5-year history (16th percentile), while SAND.ST sits higher in its own history (92nd). Within each stock's own 5-year context, OTIS is at a historically more favourable entry position than SAND.ST. This reflects entry timing, not which company is structurally stronger — peer-relative analysis is a separate question addressed above.

Describes historical entry positioning only. Descriptive — not investment advice.

Relative Position vs Comparable Companies
Profitability
Both rank well on profitability, but Otis Worldwide Corporation still holds a clear edge.
Growth
On growth, the edge is clear — both rank well, but Sandvik AB (publ) sits noticeably higher.
Profitability — Dominant Gap
OTIS
85
SAND.ST
40
Gap+45in favour of OTIS

Capital efficiency adds support, with a 62-point ROIC advantage.

What keeps the gap from being one-sided

Earnings growth also leans toward SAND.ST, which keeps the score lead from reading as a full growth sweep.

What this means for the comparison

The profitability lead is decisive, but growth still runs counter to it — the result is clear, not entirely one-sided.

Explore full peer positioning in AssetNext

Break down the OTIS vs SAND.ST comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.

Explore full breakdown →
Other comparisons with conflicting dimension signals

Explore how OTIS and SAND.ST 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.

How AssetNext Peer Scores Work

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.