The Gorman Rupp's Competitiveness
A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of The Gorman Rupp (GRC) against its publicly traded competitors: sales growth, net income, profitability, valuation and market share, plus each peer's market capitalization, revenue, income and employees. Free below: the top 5 peers. Subscriber access adds the full competitor list and CSV downloads.
Key Findings: The Gorman Rupp vs Its Competitors
- TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 703M vs 477,800M combined for tracked competitors (0.1% combined share).
- Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+5.8% annualized vs trailing 12 months), vs accelerating (+5.6%) for its tracked peer group.
- Growth: The Gorman Rupp generated 4.5% revenue growth year over year in Q2 2026, vs 9.8% for its tracked competitors combined.
- Profitability: Its 10.4% net margin compares with 23.2% for the peer group.
- Scale: The Gorman Rupp ranks #19 of 38 companies by market capitalization in the Miscellaneous Manufacturing industry, holding 0.4% of industry market cap.
- Peer revenue share: The Gorman Rupp accounted for 0.2% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group, up from 0.2% a year earlier.
- Peer differentiation: Revenue per employee of $0.48M compares with $0.75M for the peer group (0.6x).
Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).
GRC Sales vs. its Competitors, Q2 2026
The Gorman Rupp reported revenue growth of 4.50 % year on year in Q2 2026, below its competitors' combined revenue growth of 9.75 %.
With a net margin of 10.44 %, The Gorman Rupp reported lower profitability than its competitors (23.18 %).
The Gorman Rupp generated 0.15 % of the combined sales of its peer group, up from 0.15 % a year earlier.
The Gorman Rupp vs. its Competitors, Q2 2026
Revenue growth, year on year
Net income growth, year on year
Net margin
Revenue run-rate vs trailing 12 months
TTM net margin
TTM = trailing twelve months. Run-rate annualizes the latest quarter (×4) and compares it to TTM. In millions of $. High-Confidence Competitors are named as a competitor directly in an SEC filing; Similar-Size Competitors are the closest peers by market-cap rank within the same industry; Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors are the closest peers by combined revenue growth, operating margin and ROIC, all independent of the competitor list.
TTM revenue, latest-quarter run-rate and net income/margin benchmarked across The Gorman Rupp and its 4 competitor groupings. Available under Commercial License.
| Entity | TTM Revenue | Rev Run-rate vs TTM |
|---|---|---|
| The Gorman rupp Company | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Competitors combined | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar-Size Competitors (8) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar Growth & Profitability (6) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
TTM revenue, run-rate and net margin benchmarking across The Gorman Rupp's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.
For context: the Miscellaneous Manufacturing industry grew revenue 9.7% year over year, combined, vs 4.5% for The Gorman Rupp. The Gorman Rupp's share of combined industry revenue moved from 0.25% to 0.24%, a loss of 0.01 percentage points.
The Gorman Rupp's Competitor Quality Breadth
Share of each group, trailing 12 months: profitable (net margin > 0), expanding (revenue growth > 0), growing faster than the industry's own median, and financially distressed (Piotroski F-Score of 2 or below).
| Entity | Profitable | Expanding | Above Industry Growth | Distressed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Gorman rupp Company | Yes | Yes | Yes | No |
| Competitors combined (13) | ||||
| Similar-Size Competitors (10) | ||||
| Similar Growth & Profitability (8) | 100.00 % (8 of 8) | 100.00 % (8 of 8) | 75.00 % (6 of 8) | 12.50 % (1 of 8) |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Altman Z-Score is not shown here: it is not populated in the underlying data for any company. Percentages are of companies in each group that report the relevant metric, not of the full group size.
GRC Stock Performance relative to its Competitors
GRC Stock Performance relative to Similar-Size Competitors
GRC Stock Performance relative to Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors
5 Best-Performing Tracked Competitors, Trailing 12 Months
| # | Competitor | TTM Share Price Return | vs U.S.A. 500 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Babcock and Wilcox Enterprises Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 2 | Enpro Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 3 | Flowserve Corp | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 4 | Danaher Corporation | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 5 | Emerson Electric Co | 282.9% | Outperformed |
TTM share price return and U.S.A. 500 outperformance for The Gorman Rupp's best-performing tracked competitors requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months.
The Gorman Rupp's Comment on Competition and Industry Peers
Since the late 1990’s, a number of consolidations have occurred within
the highly competitive pump industry. As a consequence, numerous pump competitors
now exist as subsidiaries, divisions or departments within significantly larger
corporations. Foreign-sourced pumps have also increasingly penetrated into most
of the Company’s domestic markets.
Gorman-Rupp estimates that approximately 80 other domestic and global companies
selling pumps and pump units compete in one or more of the lines of business
and applications in which comparable products of the Company are utilized. International
competitors are based mostly in Europe and Asia.
Most commercial and industrial pumps are specifically designed and engineered
for a particular customer’s application. The Company believes that proper
application, product performance, and quality of delivery and service are its
principal methods of competition, and attributes its success to its continued
emphasis in these areas.
Publicly Traded Peers of The Gorman rupp Company
Revenue and income for trailing 12 months, in millions of $, except employees| Company | Market Cap | Revenues |
|---|---|---|
| The Gorman rupp Company | 2,008.58 | 703.19 |
| Danaher Corporation | 160,858.71 | 25,107.00 |
| Emerson Electric Co | 89,433.73 | 18,637.00 |
| Barrick Mining Corp | 70,140.63 | 16,956.00 |
| Roper Technologies Inc | 35,612.40 | 8,279.60 |
| Itt Inc | 18,604.76 | 4,738.10 |
| SUBTOTAL | 431,374.73 | 495,459.30 |
Sign in to see all competitors of The Gorman rupp Company.
Sources: The Gorman rupp Company's official press releases and regulatory filings; CSIMarket.com's market research; and the financial filings and press releases of the other companies cited.
Updated on:
Focus of this report: publicly traded companies. Ten additional tables on The Gorman rupp Company versus competitors, including market share analysis, are in the navigation menu under Competition. To download the tables, please subscribe.
The Gorman Rupp's Business Segment Mix vs Peers
Revenue by operating segment or division, as named and reported by each company. Segment names are the filer's own and are not standardized across companies. Do not assume a same-named or similarly-named segment is defined identically between two companies. Shares are of each company's own total revenue and are not required to sum to 100% (intersegment revenue, unallocated items).| Company | Largest Segment |
|---|---|
| Danaher Corporation | Diagnostics 39.36 % |
| Emerson Electric Co | Safety and Productivity 11.33 % |
| Roper Technologies Inc | Application Software 55.99 % |
| Itt Inc | Flow Technologies 44.34 % |
| Genuine Parts Co | North America Automotive 38.81 % |
Source: operating segment revenue as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API, leaf-level reportable segments only (parent roll-up segments are excluded where sub-segments are separately disclosed).
Sign in to see all peers for The Gorman rupp Company.
The Gorman Rupp's Productivity vs Peers Comparison
Revenue and income per employee, trailing 12 months, in $; market cap in millions of $| Company | Market Cap | Revenue / Employee | Income / Employee |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Gorman rupp Company | 2,009 | 484,956 | 43,010 |
| Danaher Corporation | 160,859 | 418,450 | 66,733 |
| Emerson Electric Co | 89,434 | 255,301 | 35,329 |
| Barrick Mining Corp | 70,141 | 2,608,615 | 1,100,615 |
| Roper Technologies Inc | 35,612 | 426,784 | 129,088 |
| Itt Inc | 18,605 | 408,457 | 36,767 |
| PEERS TOTAL | 429,366 | 754,976 | 158,821 |
Sign in to see all peers for The Gorman rupp Company.
The Gorman Rupp's Geographic Revenue Exposure vs Peers
Revenue by country/region as reported in each company's most recent filing. Disclosure granularity varies by filer (some report by country, others by broad region) and is shown as disclosed.| Company | Largest Market |
|---|---|
| The Gorman rupp Company | US 75.43 % |
| Danaher Corporation | North America 39.49 % |
| Genuine Parts Co | United States 64.03 % |
| Flowserve Corp | North America 44.53 % |
| Enpro Inc | United States 56.79 % |
| Badger Meter Inc | US 90.15 % |
Source: revenue geography as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API. Percentages are of that company's own total consolidated revenue for its most recent reported period.
The Gorman Rupp's Position in Industry Market Structure
Market-capitalization share and concentration across all 35 companies in The Gorman Rupp's industry classification, broader than the peer set above. Market cap in millions of $.The Gorman Rupp ranks #19 of 35 companies by market capitalization in its industry, holding 0.38 % of total industry market cap. The industry's Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) is 1,747, indicating a moderately concentrated market structure (U.S. antitrust guidance: below 1,500 unconcentrated, 1,500 to 2,500 moderately concentrated, above 2,500 highly concentrated).
| Rank | Company | Market Cap | Industry Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Abb Ltd | 181,678 | 34.64 % |
| 2 | Trane Technologies Plc | 101,133 | 19.28 % |
| 3 | Ferguson Enterprises Inc | 43,359 | 8.27 % |
| 4 | Xylem Inc | 24,109 | 4.60 % |
| 5 | Amcor Plc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 6 | Snap on Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 7 | Itt Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 8 | Idex Corp | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 9 | Stanley Black and Decker Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 10 | Graco Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 19 | The Gorman rupp Company | 1,981 | 0.38 % |
Market cap and industry share for the rest of The Gorman Rupp's industry peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation) across CSIMarket's industry classification, market capitalization as of 2026-09-28.
The Gorman Rupp's Same-Size Peers & Stock Performance
Peers chosen by closeness in market-cap rank within the same industry classification (not the named-competitor list above). Trailing 12-month total return, 3-month price momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio vs the broad U.S. market.| Rank | Company | Market Cap | TTM Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| 14 | Flowserve Corp | 9,545 | 38.59 % |
| 15 | Simpson Manufacturing Co inc | 7,245 | 2.05 % |
| 16 | Powell Industries Inc | 6,858 | 98.42 % |
| 17 | Brady Corp | 3,987 | 8.65 % |
| 18 | Thor Industries Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 19 | The Gorman rupp Company | 1,981 | 65.27 % |
| 20 | Hillman Solutions Corp | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 21 | Oil dri Corporation Of America | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 22 | Daktronics Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 23 | Winnebago Industries Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 24 | Array Technologies Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
Market cap, return, momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio for the rest of The Gorman Rupp's same-size peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation); returns and risk metrics as of 2026-09-28. Beta and Sharpe ratio are versus the broad U.S. equity market, not this industry.
The Gorman Rupp's Profitability & Cost Structure
Trailing 12-month margins from SEC-filed financials. Operating margin is compared to the Miscellaneous Manufacturing industry median; gross margin, EBITDA margin and capital intensity are compared to the live industry average (50 companies).| Metric | Company | Industry | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 31.39 % | 31.31 % (avg) | +0.1 pp |
| Operating Margin | 14.82 % | industry median | +5.1 pp |
| EBITDA Margin | 16.51 % | 5.28 % (avg) | +11.2 pp |
| Capital Intensity (Capex / Revenue) | 2.74 % | 4.37 % (avg) | -1.6 pp |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. SG&A and R&D as a share of revenue have limited coverage as this data is backfilled and appear only where reported. Higher capital intensity is not inherently negative; it reflects the industry's asset requirements.
The Gorman Rupp's Valuation vs Competitive Position
Valuation multiples vs the Miscellaneous Manufacturing industry average (50 companies, excluding loss-making/negative-equity outliers), alongside returns on capital for context on whether a premium or discount lines up with measurably stronger or weaker returns.| Metric | Company | Industry Average | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| P/E | 33.7x | 23.7x | +9.9x |
| EV / EBITDA | 20.4x | 15.2x | +5.2x |
| P/B | 5.0x | 3.1x | +1.9x |
| Return on Equity | 14.79 % | industry aggregate | -1.07 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | 8.75 % | 2.26 % (avg) | 6.49 % |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. A valuation premium or discount is not, by itself, a judgment of over- or under-valuation. Compare it against the return and growth context shown elsewhere on this page.
The Gorman Rupp's Multi-Year Financial Trajectory
Fiscal-year revenue growth, operating margin, return on invested capital and P/E, as reported in SEC filings.| Metric | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | -0.70 % | 9.21 % | -3.90 % | 2.12 % | 37.72 % | 26.53 % | 0.01 % | 3.46 % |
| Operating Margin | 9.98 % | 12.22 % | 11.01 % | 10.40 % | 7.71 % | 13.20 % | 13.87 % | 13.98 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | 5.72 % | 7.44 % | 6.88 % | 5.76 % | 3.98 % | 8.52 % | 7.98 % | 8.21 % |
| P/E | 30.9x | 21.7x | 27.3x | 38.4x | 62.3x | 26.2x | 26.0x | 24.1x |
Source: CSIMarket API, fiscal-year figures. P/E is this company's own historical ratio at each fiscal year end and can swing sharply around an earnings trough: that is real, not a data error.
The Gorman Rupp's Strategic Group Map
Every company in The Gorman Rupp's industry and named-competitor list, plotted by trailing 12-month revenue growth and operating margin. The Gorman Rupp is shown in red; its closest peers by combined growth, margin and ROIC (the Similar Growth & Profitability group above) are labeled.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Extreme outlier values (from near-zero-revenue companies) are excluded from the plotted cloud but never from the highlighted company or its labeled peers.
The Gorman Rupp's BCG Growth-Share Matrix
Relative market share (vs The Gorman Rupp's largest competitor by market cap) against industry revenue growth, using the standard textbook thresholds (1.0x share, 10% growth) a common framework, not a precision instrument.
The Gorman Rupp falls in the Dog quadrant: relative market share of 0.01x vs its largest competitor, in an industry growing revenue 4.2% (median, trailing 12 months).
Source: CSIMarket API (market-cap share and industry revenue growth). The 10% growth and 1.0x share lines are standard textbook thresholds, not derived from this industry's own distribution.
The Gorman Rupp's Competitive Forces (Porter's Five Forces)
Only the forces this data can support honestly are shown; the other three are marked as such rather than guessed.| Force | Assessment | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Competitive Rivalry | Moderate | Industry HHI of 1,747 (see Industry Market Structure & Concentration above) |
| Barriers to Entry | Lower than typical for the industry | Capital intensity (capex / revenue) of 2.74 % vs industry average 4.37 % (see Profitability & Cost Structure above) |
| Supplier Power | Not covered on this page | See The Gorman Rupp's dedicated suppliers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Buyer Power | Not covered on this page | See The Gorman Rupp's dedicated customers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Threat of Substitutes | - | No systematic data source for cross-product substitution exists in this system; not estimated |
Note: this is a partial, data-grounded application of the framework, not a complete strategic assessment. Rivalry and barriers-to-entry readings are mechanical translations of the HHI and capital-intensity figures shown elsewhere on this page, not independent judgments.
The Gorman Rupp's Industry Attractiveness & Competitive Strength
A CSIMarket composite, not a standard field: each axis is an equal-weighted average of three factors already shown elsewhere on this page (industry growth, industry profitability and rivalry for attractiveness; relative market share, profitability and growth vs industry for strength). Disclosed as a designed methodology, not a precision measurement.
The Gorman Rupp falls in the Low attractiveness / Medium strength cell: Harvest.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Each axis score is a simple 1(low)/2(medium)/3(high) average across its three inputs -- a transparent, disclosed simplification, not a validated academic scoring model.
The Gorman Rupp's SWOT
Every point below is a fixed rule applied to a metric already shown elsewhere on this page (Market Structure, Profitability, Valuation, Run-Rate, Stock Performance, Quality Breadth) not an independent strategic assessment. A blank quadrant means no rule was met, not that none apply.Strengths
- Operating margin 5.1 points above the industry median.
- Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+5.8% annualized vs trailing 12 months).
- Outperforming the U.S.A. 500 over the trailing 12 months.
Weaknesses
- Low relative market share vs the industry leader (0.01x).
Opportunities
- A meaningful share of tracked competitors (38.50 %) show financial-distress signals, a possible opening to gain share.
Threats
No rule matched.
Methodology: mechanical, rule-based SWOT. Each bullet reuses a figure already sourced and cited elsewhere on this page; nothing here is generated narrative or independent analyst judgment.
The Gorman Rupp's Financial Strength vs Peers Comparison
Quick ratio, working capital, debt to equity and asset turnover, trailing 12 months| Company | Quick Ratio | Working Capital | Debt / Equity |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Gorman rupp Company | 0.39 | 2.50 | 0.71 |
| Danaher Corporation | - | 1.73 | 0.40 |
| Emerson Electric Co | 0.05 | 0.88 | 0.65 |
| Barrick Mining Corp | 1.92 | 2.92 | 0.18 |
| Roper Technologies Inc | 0.10 | 0.54 | 0.52 |
| Itt Inc | 0.50 | 1.64 | 0.50 |
Sign in to see all peers for The Gorman rupp Company.
Quick ratio = cash / current liabilities; working capital ratio = current assets / current liabilities; asset turnover = revenue / total assets. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
The Gorman Rupp's Revenue and Income Growth vs Peers
Quarterly revenue and net income growth, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Revenue Y/Y | Income Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Gorman rupp Company | Q2 2026 | +4.5 % | +23.0 % |
| Danaher Corporation | Q2 2026 | +5.5 % | +56.8 % |
| Emerson Electric Co | Q2 2026 | +7.0 % | +22.5 % |
| Barrick Mining Corp | Q4 2025 | +48.8 % | +266.3 % |
| Roper Technologies Inc | Q2 2026 | +8.5 % | +208.9 % |
| Itt Inc | Q2 2026 | +51.5 % | -28.9 % |
| PEERS TOTAL | +13.3 % | +119.4 % |
Sign in to see all peers for The Gorman rupp Company.
Growth is shown only where both periods are positive. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
The Gorman Rupp's Peers' Costs of Sales and Capital Expenditures
Context for revenue growth: peer costs and capex, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Costs Y/Y | Capex Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Gorman rupp Company | Q2 2026 | +2.8 % | +21.9 % |
| Danaher Corporation | Q2 2026 | +10.0 % | +8.5 % |
| Emerson Electric Co | Q2 2026 | +2.7 % | +9.7 % |
| Barrick Mining Corp | Q4 2025 | +4.2 % | +23.8 % |
| Roper Technologies Inc | Q2 2026 | +6.8 % | -14.2 % |
| Itt Inc | Q2 2026 | +53.9 % | +77.4 % |
Sign in to see all peers for The Gorman rupp Company.
The Gorman Rupp's Returns and Turnover vs Peers
ROA, ROI and ROE (trailing 12 months), receivables and inventory turnover| Company | ROA | ROI | ROE |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Gorman rupp Company | 7.21% | 8.11% | 14.79% |
| Danaher Corporation | 4.72% | 5.44% | 7.66% |
| Emerson Electric Co | 6.13% | 8.71% | 12.69% |
| Barrick Mining Corp | 13.87% | 15.24% | 19.92% |
| Roper Technologies Inc | 7.21% | 7.27% | 12.94% |
| Itt Inc | 5.09% | 5.78% | 10.45% |
Sign in to see all peers for The Gorman rupp Company.
ROA = net income / total assets; ROI = net income / investments; ROE = net income / equity; turnover ratios use trailing 12 month revenue (receivables) and cost of sales (inventory).
The Gorman Rupp's Valuation vs Peers
P/E, price to sales, PEG, price to cash flow and price to book| Company | P/E | Price / Sales |
|---|---|---|
| The Gorman rupp Company | 32.08 | 2.86 |
| Danaher Corporation | 40.45 | 6.41 |
| Emerson Electric Co | 34.88 | 4.80 |
| Barrick Mining Corp | 14.02 | 4.14 |
| Roper Technologies Inc | 14.67 | 4.30 |
| Itt Inc | 40.54 | 3.93 |
| PEERS AVERAGE | 4.14 | 0.87 |
Sign in to see all peers for The Gorman rupp Company.
P/E = price / diluted EPS (trailing 12 months); PEG = P/E divided by EPS growth; the average row divides the peers' combined market cap by their combined income, sales, cash flow and equity.