Competition & Peer Data API & CSV Delivery

Taylor Devices Inc's Competitiveness

A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of Taylor Devices Inc (TAYD) 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.

Peer Data As of Q4 2026
Competitors Tracked
-
Publicly traded peers
Peer Group Market Share
100.00 %
vs 100.00 % a year ago
Revenue Growth Y/Y
-42.46 %
Q4 2026
Net Margin
20.85 %
Q4 2026

Key Findings: Taylor Devices Inc vs Its Competitors

  • TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 42M vs -M combined for tracked competitors (100.0% combined share).
  • Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is decelerating (-14.0% annualized vs trailing 12 months).
  • Scale: Taylor Devices Inc ranks #82 of 143 companies by market capitalization in the Industrial Machinery and Components industry, holding 0.0% of industry market cap.
  • Peer revenue share: Taylor Devices Inc 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).

TAYD Sales vs. its Competitors, Q4 2026

Taylor Devices Inc generated 100.00 % of the combined sales of its peer group, up from 100.00 % a year earlier.

API endpoints for this dataset
https://api.csimarket.com/api/v1/companies/TAYD/competitors
https://api.csimarket.com/api/v1/companies/TAYD/relationships
https://api.csimarket.com/api/v1/companies/TAYD/similar
Programmatic access for models, analytics, and integration workflows.

For context: the Industrial Machinery and Components industry grew revenue 12.4% year over year, combined, vs -42.5% for Taylor Devices Inc. Taylor Devices Inc's share of combined industry revenue moved from 0.01% to 0.01%, a loss of 0.01 percentage points.

Taylor Devices Inc'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
Taylor Devices Inc Yes No No Yes
High-Confidence Competitors (1) 100% 100% 0% 0%
Similar-Size Competitors (10) 71% 63% 50% 10%
Similar Growth & Profitability (8) 87.50 % (7 of 8) 12.50 % (1 of 8) 0.00 % (0 of 8) 50.00 % (4 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.

Market Share of the Peer Group, Q4 2026

100%market share
  • Taylor Devices Inc100.0%
  • Competitors combined0.0%

Share of combined quarterly revenue of Taylor Devices Inc and its 0 tracked competitors.

See Taylor Devices Inc's full market share breakdown »

TAYD Stock Performance relative to its Competitors

TAYD Competitors (weighted) Percent change over the selected range

Taylor Devices Inc's Share Price Performance vs Peer Groups

Trailing 12-month total share price return, and the share of each group that outperformed the U.S.A. 500 over the same period. Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors are the closest peers by combined revenue growth, operating margin and ROIC.
100%beat U.S.A. 500
High-Confidence
(1 of 1)
50%beat U.S.A. 500
Similar-Size
(5 of 10)
16.7%beat U.S.A. 500
Similar Growth & Profitability
(1 of 6)
Entity TTM Share Price Return
(group: median)
vs U.S.A. 500
Taylor Devices Inc 29.00 % Outperformed
Competitors combined (0) 40.4% 63.2%
High-Confidence Competitors (1) 40.4% 63.2%
Similar-Size Competitors (10) 40.4% 63.2%
Similar Growth & Profitability (6) 40.4% 63.2%
Peer Group Share Price Returns

TTM share price return and U.S.A. 500 outperformance for Taylor Devices Inc's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.

Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation). Outperformance is trailing-12-month total return vs the U.S.A. 500 over the same window, not risk-adjusted.

TAYD Stock Performance relative to High-Confidence Competitors

TAYD High-Confidence Competitors (equal-weighted, 1) Percent change over the selected range

TAYD Stock Performance relative to Similar-Size Competitors

TAYD Similar-Size Competitors (equal-weighted, 10) Percent change over the selected range

TAYD Stock Performance relative to Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors

TAYD Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors (equal-weighted, 8) Percent change over the selected range

Taylor Devices Inc's Comment on Competition and Industry Peers

The Company faces competition in hydraulic energy absorbers within mature aerospace and defense programs, including from technologies with different designs. In the industrial products group, its main competitors include several foreign companies and two U.S. companies producing crane buffers and industrial shock absorbers. The Company competes directly with three other U.S. firms supplying structural damping devices. For structural applications outside the U.S., competition includes several firms, particularly in Japan and Taiwan. Additionally, the Company competes with numerous firms providing alternative seismic protection technologies.

Taylor Devices Inc's Competitors Named by the Company

Competitive relationships identified from SEC filings and corroborating sources, each with a basis and confidence.
Competitor Basis Confidence Active Sources
Ennis Inc Named by the company 85% 2022 to 2026 3
Competitor Evidence Detail

Filing basis, confidence, active dates and source counts for Taylor Devices Inc'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.