Lindsay's Competitiveness
A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of Lindsay (LNN) 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: Lindsay vs Its Competitors
- TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 628M vs 0M combined for tracked competitors (100.0% combined share).
- Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+2.4% annualized vs trailing 12 months).
- Scale: Lindsay ranks #61 of 143 companies by market capitalization in the Industrial Machinery and Components industry, holding 0.1% of industry market cap.
- Peer revenue share: Lindsay accounted for 100.0% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group, up from 100.0% a year earlier.
Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).
LNN Sales vs. its Competitors, Q3 2026
Lindsay generated 100.00 % of the combined sales of its peer group, up from 100.00 % a year earlier.
Lindsay vs. its Competitors, Q3 2026
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 Lindsay and its 4 competitor groupings. Available under Commercial License.
| Entity | TTM Revenue | Rev Run-rate vs TTM |
|---|---|---|
| Lindsay Corporation | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Competitors combined | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar-Size Competitors (8) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar Growth & Profitability (3) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
TTM revenue, run-rate and net margin benchmarking across Lindsay's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.
For context: the Industrial Machinery and Components industry grew revenue 13.8% year over year, combined, vs -5.1% for Lindsay. Lindsay's share of combined industry revenue moved from 0.14% to 0.12%, a loss of 0.02 percentage points.
Lindsay'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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lindsay Corporation | Yes | No | No | Yes |
| Competitors combined (1) | - | - | - | |
| Similar-Size Competitors (10) | ||||
| Similar Growth & Profitability (8) | 100.00 % (8 of 8) | 12.50 % (1 of 8) | 0.00 % (0 of 8) | 28.60 % (2 of 7) |
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.
LNN Stock Performance relative to its Competitors
LNN Stock Performance relative to Similar-Size Competitors
LNN Stock Performance relative to Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors
Lindsay's Comment on Competition and Industry Peers
Four primary manufacturers control a substantial majority of the U.S. center pivot irrigation system industry. The international irrigation market includes participation and competition by the leading U.S. manufacturers as well as various regional manufacturers. The Company competes in certain product lines with several manufacturers, some of whom may have greater financial resources than the Company. The Company competes by continuously improving its products through ongoing research and development activities. Competition also occurs in areas of price and seasonal programs, product quality, durability, controls, product characteristics, retention and reputation of local dealers, customer service, and, at certain times of the year, the availability of systems and their delivery time. The Company believes it competes favorably with respect to all of these factors.
The Company competes in certain product lines with several manufacturers, some of whom may have greater financial resources than the Company. The Company competes by continuously improving its products through ongoing research and development activities. The Company competes with certain products and companies in its crash cushion business, but has limited competition in its moveable barrier line, as there is not another moveable barrier product today comparable to the Road Zipper System™. However, the Company’s barrier product does compete with traditional “safety shaped” concrete barriers and other safety barriers.
Publicly Traded Peers of Lindsay Corporation
Revenue and income for trailing 12 months, in millions of $, except employees| Company | Market Cap | Revenues |
|---|---|---|
| Lindsay Corporation | 1,171.07 | 627.86 |
| Star Gold Corp | 30.90 | 0.00 |
| SUBTOTAL | 1,201.97 | 627.86 |
Sources: Lindsay Corporation'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 Lindsay Corporation versus competitors, including market share analysis, are in the navigation menu under Competition. To download the tables, please subscribe.
Lindsay's Competitors Named by the Company
Competitive relationships identified from SEC filings and corroborating sources, each with a basis and confidence.| Competitor | Basis | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| Star Gold Corp | Named by the company | 85% |
Filing basis, confidence, active dates and source counts for Lindsay's named competitors require a Commercial License.
Methodology: relationships are extracted from SEC filings (named-competitor disclosures) and corroborating sources. Named by the company = explicitly disclosed as a competitor; Inferred = derived from corroborating signals. Confidence reflects evidence strength.
Lindsay'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 |
|---|---|
| Lindsay Corporation | Irrigation 82.75 % |
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).
Lindsay'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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lindsay Corporation | 1,171 | 492,436 | 43,295 |
| Star Gold Corp | 31 | - | - |
| PEERS TOTAL | 31 | - | - |
Lindsay'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 |
|---|---|
| Lindsay Corporation | International 44.59 % |
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.
Lindsay's Position in Industry Market Structure
Market-capitalization share and concentration across all 128 companies in Lindsay's industry classification, broader than the peer set above. Market cap in millions of $.Lindsay ranks #61 of 128 companies by market capitalization in its industry, holding 0.05 % of total industry market cap. The industry's Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) is 1,597, 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 | Asml Holding Nv | 710,392 | 32.39 % |
| 2 | Lam Research Corporation | 410,038 | 18.70 % |
| 3 | Deere and Co | 184,045 | 8.39 % |
| 4 | Eaton Corporation Plc | 168,186 | 7.67 % |
| 5 | Cae Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 6 | Bloom Energy Corporation | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 7 | Illinois Tool Works Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 8 | Carrier Global Corporation | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 9 | Ingersoll Rand Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 10 | Nvent Electric Plc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 61 | Lindsay Corporation | 1,171 | 0.05 % |
Market cap and industry share for the rest of Lindsay's industry peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation) across CSIMarket's industry classification, market capitalization as of 2026-09-30.
Lindsay'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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 56 | Ats Corp | 1,793 | -30.72 % |
| 57 | Azenta Inc | 1,554 | 21.81 % |
| 58 | Energizer Holdings Inc | 1,517 | -11.91 % |
| 59 | Amprius Technologies Inc | 1,389 | -9.23 % |
| 60 | Cricut Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 61 | Lindsay Corporation | 1,171 | -19.12 % |
| 62 | Fuelcell Energy inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 63 | Tennant Co | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 64 | Fluence Energy Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 65 | Eos Energy Enterprises Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 66 | Graham Corporation | 1,234 | 12.3% |
Market cap, return, momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio for the rest of Lindsay's same-size peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation); returns and risk metrics as of 2026-09-30. Beta and Sharpe ratio are versus the broad U.S. equity market, not this industry.
Lindsay's Profitability & Cost Structure
Trailing 12-month margins from SEC-filed financials. Operating margin is compared to the Industrial Machinery and Components industry median; gross margin, EBITDA margin and capital intensity are compared to the live industry average (166 companies). See the full Industrial Machinery and Components industry profitability benchmarks.| Metric | Company | Industry | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 29.46 % | 28.58 % (avg) | +0.9 pp |
| Operating Margin | 9.95 % | industry median | +4.3 pp |
| EBITDA Margin | 14.95 % | 3.86 % (avg) | +11.1 pp |
| Capital Intensity (Capex / Revenue) | 7.93 % | 5.98 % (avg) | +2.0 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.
Lindsay's Valuation vs Competitive Position
Valuation multiples vs the Industrial Machinery and Components industry average (166 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. See the full Industrial Machinery and Components industry valuation benchmarks.| Metric | Company | Industry Average | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| P/E | 21.8x | 33.3x | -11.5x |
| EV / EBITDA | 11.6x | 19.5x | -7.9x |
| P/B | 2.3x | 4.0x | -1.8x |
| Return on Equity | 10.73 % | industry aggregate | -4.93 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | 5.17 % | 1.28 % (avg) | 3.89 % |
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.
Lindsay's Multi-Year Financial Trajectory
Fiscal-year revenue growth, operating margin, return on invested capital and P/E, as reported in SEC filings.| Metric | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | 0.57 % | -17.49 % | 7.31 % | 31.98 % | 24.86 % | -19.40 % | -7.17 % | 8.81 % |
| Operating Margin | 6.43 % | 3.70 % | 10.44 % | 9.58 % | 13.56 % | 14.18 % | 11.64 % | 13.04 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | 4.94 % | 2.35 % | 6.43 % | 7.07 % | 11.22 % | 8.41 % | 6.28 % | 7.09 % |
| P/E | 56.3x | 111.0x | 36.5x | 37.4x | 23.9x | 22.6x | 20.5x | 17.6x |
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.
Lindsay's Strategic Group Map
Every company in Lindsay's industry and named-competitor list, plotted by trailing 12-month revenue growth and operating margin. Lindsay 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.
Lindsay's BCG Growth-Share Matrix
Relative market share (vs Lindsay'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.
Lindsay falls in the Dog quadrant: relative market share of 0.00x vs its largest competitor, in an industry growing revenue 7.4% (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.
Lindsay'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 1,597 (see Industry Market Structure & Concentration above) |
| Barriers to Entry | High (capital intensive) | Capital intensity (capex / revenue) of 7.93 % vs industry average 5.98 % (see Profitability & Cost Structure above) |
| Supplier Power | Not covered on this page | See Lindsay's dedicated suppliers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Buyer Power | Not covered on this page | See Lindsay'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.
Lindsay'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.
Lindsay falls in the Medium attractiveness / Medium strength cell: Selective.
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.
Lindsay'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
- Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+2.4% annualized vs trailing 12 months).
Weaknesses
- Underperforming the U.S.A. 500 over the trailing 12 months.
- Low relative market share vs the industry leader (0.00x).
- Piotroski F-Score of 2 or below, the standard financial-distress signal.
Opportunities
- Trades at a lower P/E than the industry average (21.8x vs 33.3x) despite a higher return on invested capital -- a possible re-rating opportunity.
Threats
- High capital intensity requires continuous reinvestment just to keep pace with the industry.
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.
Lindsay'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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lindsay Corporation | 1.27 | 3.25 | 0.22 |
| Star Gold Corp | 1.86 | 2.06 | 0.16 |
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.
Lindsay'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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lindsay Corporation | Q2 2026 | -5.1 % | -18.9 % |
| Star Gold Corp | Q2 2026 | - | - |
| PEERS TOTAL | -5.1 % | -23.4 % |
Growth is shown only where both periods are positive. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Lindsay'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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lindsay Corporation | Q2 2026 | -2.5 % | -13.7 % |
| Star Gold Corp | Q2 2026 | - | - |
Lindsay's Returns and Turnover vs Peers
ROA, ROI and ROE (trailing 12 months), receivables and inventory turnover| Company | ROA | ROI | ROE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lindsay Corporation | 6.63% | 7.95% | 10.73% |
| Star Gold Corp | - | - | - |
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).
Lindsay's Valuation vs Peers
P/E, price to sales, PEG, price to cash flow and price to book| Company | P/E | Price / Sales |
|---|---|---|
| Lindsay Corporation | 21.74 | 1.87 |
| Star Gold Corp | - | 441,463.27 |
| PEERS AVERAGE | 22.46 | 1.91 |
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.