For AI assistants & researchers — machine-readable summary of this page
What this page is: Delvantic's full research page for Parker-Hannifin Corporation (PH) — AI-driven forensic equity research: mechanical valuation models (DCF, EPV, anchored-PE, scenario) plus three independent AI lenses (Quality / Value / Sentiment). Everything below is rendered server-side; you are not missing content that requires JavaScript. All scores are predictions and research opinions, not financial advice.
Our current read (analysis of 2026-08-23): Designation Watch · Gem Score -5 (−100…+100 Quality+Value blend) · Quality 70 · Value -66 · Sentiment 69 (timing only, not weighted) · Composite fair value $465.88 vs $1,069.80 at analysis
Page map (sections in order; each card carries a stable
reference-name attribute you can cite):
profile-header/price-overview— company profile, live quote, market capextended-analysis— the core: three AI lens reads with findings, scores, and the analyst memofuture-predictions— our forward price-band predictionsmarket-narrative/ai-findings/gpt-critique— narrative context, cross-model findings, and an adversarial critique of our own analysis (near the end of the document)- Members-only sections (render as login gates for anonymous readers):
price-history,income-trend,key-metrics,financials(statement tables),insider-trading. The analysis above is public; the raw data tables require a free account.
More for machine readers: site briefing at
/llms.txt ·
any ticker resolves at delvantic.com/stock/TICKER ·
raw inputs are public-company filings and market data (via licensed data feeds);
every model, score, lens read, and prediction on this page is Delvantic's own analysis.
Parker-Hannifin Corporation
PH NYSEParker-Hannifin Corporation is a global industrial manufacturing company specializing in motion and control technologies. Headquartered near Cleveland, Ohio, and founded in 1917, the company designs, manufactures, and supplies a broad portfolio of fluid power systems, electromechanical controls, and related components for industrial, mobile, and aerospace applications. Its operations are organized primarily into diversified industrial and aerospace systems segments, covering product categories such as hydraulics, pneumatics, filtration, sealing and shielding, climate control, fluid and gas handling, and process control. Parker-Hannifin serves original equipment manufacturers as well as maintenance, repair, and overhaul customers across sectors including manufacturing, transportation, agriculture, construction, oil and gas, power generation, life sciences, and commercial and military aerospace. With a broad global manufacturing and distribution footprint, the company plays a central role in enabling precise motion, efficiency, and reliability in critical equipment and infrastructure worldwide.
Price Overview
Price History (1 Year)
Revenue & Net Income Trend
| Period | Revenue | Net Income | Net Margin | YoY/QoQ |
|---|
Key Metrics
EPS (Diluted): 27.12
Total Equity: $13.69B
Shares: 130,200,000
Total Debt: $7.51B
Cash: $467.00M
EBITDA: $4.70B
Total Debt: $7.51B
Cash: $467.00M
Revenue: $19.85B
Revenue: $19.85B
Revenue: $19.85B
Total Equity: $13.69B
Tax Rate: 14.0%
Equity: $13.69B
Total Debt: $7.51B
Cash: $467.00M
Current Liabilities: $5.82B
Long-Term Debt: $7.50B
Total Debt: $7.51B
Total Equity: $13.69B
Shares: 130,200,000
Shares: 130,200,000
CapEx: -$435.00M
Shares: 130,200,000
Stock Price: $1,070
Net Income: $3.53B
Industry Benchmarks
Income Statement (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 6, 2026 8:27pm (16d ago)| Metric | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $14.3B | $15.9B | $19.1B | $19.9B | $19.9B |
| Cost of Revenue | $10.4B | $11.4B | $12.6B | $12.8B | $12.5B |
| Gross Profit | $3.9B | $4.5B | $6.4B | $7.1B | $7.3B |
| Operating Expenses | $1.4B | $1.5B | $3.0B | $3.1B | $3.0B |
| Operating Income | $2.5B | $3.0B | $3.4B | $4.1B | $4.3B |
| Net Income | $1.7B | $1.3B | $2.1B | $2.8B | $3.5B |
| EBITDA | $2.7B | $3.2B | $3.7B | $4.4B | $4.7B |
| EPS | $13.54 | $10.24 | $16.23 | $22.13 | $27.52 |
| EPS (Diluted) | $13.35 | $10.09 | $16.04 | $21.84 | $27.12 |
Balance Sheet (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 5, 2026 9:38am (18d ago)| Metric | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cash & Equivalents | $733.1M | $535.8M | $475.2M | $422.0M | $467.0M |
| Total Current Assets | $5.6B | $12.0B | $6.8B | $6.8B | $7.0B |
| Total Assets | $20.3B | $25.9B | $30.0B | $29.3B | $29.5B |
| Current Liabilities | $3.1B | $5.9B | $7.7B | $7.3B | $5.8B |
| Long-Term Debt | $6.6B | $10.1B | $10.8B | $8.4B | $7.5B |
| Total Liabilities | $11.9B | $17.1B | $19.6B | $17.2B | $15.8B |
| Total Equity | $8.4B | $8.9B | $10.3B | $12.1B | $13.7B |
| Retained Earnings | $14.9B | $15.7B | $17.0B | $19.1B | $21.8B |
Cash Flow (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 6, 2026 8:27pm (16d ago)| Metric | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash Flow | $2.6B | $2.4B | $3.0B | $3.4B | $3.8B |
| Capital Expenditure | -$210.0M | -$230.0M | -$380.7M | -$400.1M | -$435.0M |
| Free Cash Flow | $2.4B | $2.2B | $2.6B | $3.0B | $3.3B |
| Acquisitions (net) | $0 | $0 | -$7.1B | $0 | $0 |
| Net Debt Issued / (Repaid) | -$1.2B | $3.6B | -$317.2M | -$2.4B | -$990.0M |
| Dividends Paid | -$475.2M | -$569.9M | -$704.1M | -$782.0M | -$861.0M |
| Stock Buybacks | -$218.8M | -$460.1M | -$297.3M | -$332.1M | -$1.8B |
| Net Change in Cash | $47.6M | $5.9B | -$6.2B | -$53.2M | $45.0M |
Growth Trends (YoY %)
Last updated: Aug 6, 2026 8:27pm (16d ago)| Metric | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | +10.6% | +20.2% | +4.5% | -0.4% |
| Gross Profit Growth | +14.8% | +43.7% | +10.9% | +2.6% |
| Operating Income Growth | +20.9% | +14.4% | +19.5% | +6.8% |
| Net Income Growth | -24.7% | +58.3% | +36.5% | +24.2% |
| EBITDA Growth | +18.4% | +15.1% | +18.7% | +6.4% |
Dividend History (Last 20)
Last updated: Aug 5, 2026 9:38am (18d ago)| Date | Dividend | Declaration | Record | Payment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-08 | $2.00 | — | — | — |
| 2026-02-06 | $1.80 | — | — | — |
| 2025-11-07 | $1.80 | — | — | — |
| 2025-09-02 | $1.80 | — | — | — |
| 2025-05-09 | $1.80 | — | — | — |
| 2025-02-07 | $1.63 | — | — | — |
| 2024-11-08 | $1.63 | — | — | — |
| 2024-08-28 | $1.63 | — | — | — |
| 2024-05-09 | $1.63 | — | — | — |
| 2024-02-08 | $1.48 | — | — | — |
| 2023-11-10 | $1.48 | — | — | — |
| 2023-08-25 | $1.48 | — | — | — |
| 2023-05-11 | $1.48 | — | — | — |
| 2023-02-09 | $1.33 | — | — | — |
| 2022-11-10 | $1.33 | — | — | — |
| 2022-08-26 | $1.33 | — | — | — |
| 2022-05-12 | $1.33 | — | — | — |
| 2022-02-10 | $1.03 | — | — | — |
| 2021-11-10 | $1.03 | — | — | — |
| 2021-08-26 | $1.03 | — | — | — |
Deep Analysis
Narrative Economics
market-narrative step).
Claude Reading
Looking at the raw numbers first: revenue growth is essentially dead — FY25 rev of $19.85B vs FY24 $19.93B is flat, and recent YoY prints are -0.4%. The earnings CAGR of 30% is real but it's a margin story, not a volume story: gross margin went 27%→37% from FY21→FY25, operating margin from 17%→22%, and NI nearly tripled ($1.32B→$3.53B) on 25% revenue growth over four years. The quarterly trajectory is more concerning than the annuals suggest — margins peaked at 20% in Dec-2024 and have compressed to 16.3-16.5% in the last two prints, even as revenue re-accelerated to $5.49B in Mar-2026 (a genuine sequential high). That's operating deleverage showing up right as the stock trades at 39x earnings. ROIC of 18% and ROE of 26% are legitimately excellent; debt/equity 0.55 and $3.34B FCF give balance sheet flexibility. This is a high-quality asset — the question is entirely price.
Where I part ways with the synthesis: a $395-415 fair value against $1,070 is a 61% haircut, which is a DCF output that has clearly failed a smell test. Parker at $415 would trade at ~15x earnings and ~10x EV/EBITDA — that's crisis pricing for a business earning 18% ROIC with aerospace tailwinds and $3.5B in annual net income. The DCF is likely using too high a discount rate, too low a terminal growth, or refusing to credit the structural margin reset. That said, the synthesis's *direction* is right even if the magnitude is absurd. A defensible fair value for PH sits at roughly 22-25x forward earnings on ~$14-15 EPS run-rate, i.e., $310-375B... no, $310-375 per share is wrong — let me redo: $3.5B NI on ~126M shares ≈ $28 EPS, so 22-25x gets you $615-700. Even generous 28x = $785. At $1,070 the stock is pricing something like 32-35x on flat-revenue earnings, which requires either aerospace-driven acceleration or continued margin expansion from an already-elevated 22% op margin. That's the bet.
The contrarian case the models underweight: aerospace is 40%+ of PH's mix post-Meggitt, and the aerospace cycle has years left — order backlogs at Boeing/Airbus stretch to 2030, and PH's aftermarket exposure is high-margin and recurring. If aerospace mix keeps climbing, blended margins could push higher still, and the 39x P/E compresses via earnings growth rather than multiple contraction. The narrative engine's "fallen-angel" framing feels wrong — PH isn't fallen, it's re-rated because the Meggitt acquisition genuinely changed the business mix. That's a fundamentals change, not pure narrative. The "moderate durability" call understates how sticky aerospace aftermarket revenue is. On the other hand: the two most recent quarters showing 16% margins vs the 20% peak is a real yellow flag that the model outputs mostly ignore — either mix is shifting unfavorably or cyclical industrial weakness is biting. That deserved more airtime than it got.
Where I land: the synthesis is directionally correct (overvalued) but its $415 anchor is not credible and shouldn't be used to size a short or trim aggressively. My honest fair value range is $700-800, implying ~25-35% downside rather than 60%. The recent margin compression (16.3-16.5% net vs 20% peak) is the key data point everyone glossed over — if that continues for two more quarters, the multiple can't hold and you get a re-rating toward $800. If Q4 shows margins recovering to 18%+ on the aerospace mix shift, the bull case reasserts and the stock can grind sideways at premium multiples. I'd agree with "overvalued" but at partial conviction — the synthesis math is broken enough that I can't table-pound, and PH is genuinely too high-quality to short. For holders: trim. For new money: wait for either a margin-recovery print (bullish confirmation) or a $850-900 pullback (better entry). Don't chase at 39x with revenue growth stalled and quarterly margins rolling over.
GPT Reading
At $1,069, Parker-Hannifin is being valued less like a high-quality industrial and more like a scarce software-like compounder, and the financials do not support that leap. The business is undeniably excellent: annual revenue has climbed from $14.35B in 2021 to $19.85B in 2025, operating income from $2.46B to $4.35B, and free cash flow to $3.34B. Margins have structurally improved as well, with gross margin at 36.9%, operating margin 21.9%, and net margin 17.8% in FY2025. Even the quarterly run-rate is strong: the last four quarters sum to about $20.98B of revenue and $3.48B of net income, with net margins consistently in the mid-to-high teens. But that is precisely the problem for the stock, not the business. On trailing numbers, investors are paying roughly 39x earnings, 31x EV/EBITDA, 7.3x revenue, and about 40x free cash flow. For a company whose reported revenue CAGR is just 2% and whose most recent quarterly revenue was still down 0.4% year over year, that multiple stack is extreme.
What stands out to me is that almost all the equity story is margin and quality rerating, not growth. FY2025 revenue of $19.85B was actually slightly below FY2024’s $19.93B, yet net income jumped from $2.84B to $3.53B. That tells you management has executed very well operationally, but it also tells you the easier part of the value creation may already have happened. Quarterly revenue has recovered from $4.74B in December 2024 to $5.49B in March 2026, so there is some top-line reacceleration, but not at the level that usually justifies a trillion-turn valuation multiple for an industrial. The market cap of $134.9B against latest annual FCF of $3.34B implies a FCF yield around 2.5%. That can work for a business compounding revenue high-single-digits with long reinvestment runway; it is far harder to justify for a diversified motion-and-control manufacturer with modest organic growth and cyclical end markets. ROIC of 18.0% is very good, but not so extraordinary that I can ignore paying more than 10x book and more than 7x sales for a company with a 0.69% dividend yield.
The strongest bull argument is that Parker has changed category. The jump in profitability since 2021 is not cosmetic: operating margin has expanded from 17.1% to 21.9%, gross profit has risen from $3.90B to $7.32B, and annual net income has more than doubled from $1.75B in 2021 to $3.53B in 2025 despite only moderate revenue growth. Recent quarters also show earnings resilience: net income went from $698M in September 2024 to $962M in March 2025, and after a lighter June 2025 quarter at $923M, the next three quarters came in at $808M, $845M, and $904M on rising revenue. Debt is manageable at $7.51B versus $13.69B of equity, current ratio is adequate at 1.19, and cash conversion is solid with $3.78B of operating cash flow on $3.53B of net income. If you believe this is now a structurally higher-margin, less cyclical aerospace-and-industrials compounder, then premium multiples are deserved because the market is paying for durability, not just next year’s EPS.
I still weigh that evidence differently because valuation leaves almost no room for ordinary industrial disappointment. The earnings CAGR of 30.2% is flattering because it is coming off a lower base and reflects margin expansion faster than revenue growth; that is rarely repeatable indefinitely. In the latest four quarters, aggregate net income of roughly $3.48B is actually a touch below FY2025’s $3.53B, while the share price is asking investors to underwrite another leg of rerating anyway. With only $467M of cash, Parker is not sitting on excess dry powder relative to its size, and while leverage is reasonable, future returns will need to come from continued execution rather than balance-sheet magic. If revenue remains around $20B–$21B and margins simply hold rather than expand, the current valuation starts to look like a peak-multiple situation. I can accept Parker as a best-in-class industrial; I cannot accept paying a premium multiple normally reserved for faster-growing, more recurring, less cyclical businesses.
What would change my mind is specific evidence that growth is inflecting enough to carry the multiple without further heroic margin gains. If Parker can sustain quarterly revenue above $5.5B and push annual sales toward $22B while keeping net margins around 17%-18%, then earnings power would move decisively above $4B and the valuation would become less absurd. I would also revisit a more constructive stance on a major de-rating: somewhere in the $750-$850 range, the stock would still be expensive, but the quality and cash generation would begin to compensate for cyclical risk. Absent that, I think the market has fully capitalized Parker’s excellence and then some.
Grok Reading
Parker-Hannifin’s numbers tell a clean but unforgiving story: a high-quality industrial that has already harvested most of its easy margin gains and is now being valued as if those gains were still ahead of it. Fiscal 2025 revenue of $19.85B was essentially flat versus $19.93B the prior year, and the five-year revenue CAGR sits at roughly 2%. Yet net income climbed from $2.84B to $3.53B and free cash flow reached $3.34B on only $435M of capex, producing an 18% ROIC and 26% ROE. That is real operational excellence. The problem is price. At $1,070 the stock commands 39× earnings, 31× EV/EBITDA and 7× sales; the free-cash-flow yield is a meager 2.5%. Recent quarterly prints show revenue re-accelerating modestly ($5.49B in the March 2026 quarter, up roughly 11% year-on-year), but net margins have already rolled over from the 19–20% peaks of late 2024 into the mid-16% range. The market is paying a software multiple for a mid-cycle industrial whose top line is still barely growing and whose margin expansion story is visibly maturing.
The valuation synthesis that pins fair value near $415 is directionally correct even if the absolute number is harsh. Even granting Parker a permanent quality premium—say 22–25× forward earnings on a $3.6–3.8B net-income run-rate—implies a $650–750 range, still 30–40% below the current quote. Balance-sheet leverage is manageable (net debt roughly $7B, debt-to-equity 0.55), cash conversion is excellent, and the company sits as a sector leader with pricing power in fragmented markets. None of that justifies an EV/FCF multiple above 40× when organic growth remains low-single-digit and macro headwinds are explicitly flagged. The 900 bp gross-margin expansion that took the company from the high-20s to 37% is already in the rear-view mirror; further expansion from a 22% operating margin will be incremental, not transformative.
The strongest contrary case rests on the earnings power trajectory and the durability of the re-rating. Earnings CAGR of 30% and FCF CAGR of 13% over the recent period demonstrate that management can still extract leverage even when revenue is flat. Aerospace exposure and industrial automation tailwinds could push organic growth into the mid-single digits for several years, and a disciplined M&A machine could layer on accretion the DCF models under-weight. If the market continues to treat “profitable industrials” as a scarce asset class, the 39× multiple can persist longer than mean-reversion arithmetic suggests. I weigh this less heavily because the narrative itself concedes that story accounts for roughly 60% of the current price—the $655 gap above a ~$415 cash-flow anchor. When 60% of enterprise value is narrative and the narrative hinges on continued multiple expansion plus a benign industrial cycle, the asymmetry is poor. Margin compression already visible in the last three quarters is the first crack; a soft landing that turns into a harder industrial slowdown would expose how little growth is actually embedded in the fundamentals.
Two concrete developments would force a rethink: sustained organic revenue growth above 6–7% for four consecutive quarters while holding operating margins at or above 22%, or a large, clearly accretive acquisition that visibly lifts the medium-term earnings power above $5B. Absent either, the stock remains a high-quality compounder priced for a growth profile it does not possess.
Big-3 Panel — where each AI stands
Advanced Analysis Forensic deep-dive · separate lenses
Parker-Hannifin shows a textbook mature-earner profile with genuine improvement. Revenue scaled from $14.35B (2021) to $19.85B (2025), while gross margin expanded from 27.2% to 36.9% and operating margin from 17.1% to 21.9% - roughly 480bps of operating leverage over four years. Net income nearly doubled (1.75B to 3.53B) and FCF rose from $2.37B to $3.34B. This margin trajectory (post the Meggitt-era mix shift toward Aerospace) suggests real structural improvement, not cyclical noise. Earnings integrity is high: OCF/NI at 1.4x, accruals at -2.8% of assets, Beneish M of -2.49, and Altman Z of 7.36 all point to conservatively stated earnings backed by cash. Dilution discipline is exemplary - diluted shares essentially flat at ~130M over five years, SBC only 0.8% of revenue, and buybacks running 4.3x SBC. Per-share value is being protected and compounded. The one real constraint is the balance sheet: $7.04B net debt against only $467M liquid cash (0.4% of market cap). This is not a fortress; it is a leveraged industrial that services its debt comfortably out of $3.3B of annual FCF. Altman Z of 7.36 confirms bankruptcy risk is negligible, but there is no cash cushion for opportunistic action without incremental borrowing.
Verify before trusting this (5)
- Aerospace segment revenue and margin contribution post-Meggitt - is the margin expansion structural or mix-driven with limits?
- Debt maturity schedule and weighted cost of debt given the $7B+ net debt load
- Organic vs acquired revenue growth mix over 2021-2025
- Order backlog and book-to-bill trends given the 2025 revenue plateau
- Pension and OPEB obligations not captured in headline net debt
The e2e composite fair value of $395 and signal-adjusted $415 imply -61% downside from $1,070, but that math is dragged down by a DCF of $273 and EPV floor of $236 that are almost certainly too conservative for a business compounding operating margin from 17% to 22% and generating $3B+ FCF. The anchored-PE of $799 is the most credible single anchor and even that sits ~25% below the current price. Blending a quality premium onto the anchored-PE (call it $850-950 for a Strong-graded compounder with pricing power and clean earnings) still leaves the stock 10-20% rich.
Verify before trusting this (4)
- Forward aerospace segment guidance and backlog conversion - a key margin driver
- Net debt trajectory and pace of deleveraging post-recent M&A
- Whether 22% operating margin is a plateau or a waypoint - segment mix commentary
- Organic vs price-driven growth split in latest quarter to test cyclical-top thesis
The non-fundamental pressure on PH is decisively positive in the immediate window. The stock gapped roughly 10-11% on a Q4 beat with record $21.5B sales, 27.3% segment margins, and raised FY27 guidance plus a fresh 30% margin target by FY31. Financial media framing is uniformly bullish ('leaps past buy point,' 'broader recovery,' 'record'), which is the kind of narrative fuel that keeps momentum buyers and trend-followers engaged for weeks, not days. The fallen-angel-to-hidden-quality-compounder story now has a fresh datapoint to defend it. Against a risk-on tape (VIX 15, S&P near highs) and a 1.13 beta, this name gets amplified upside from the general bid for cyclicals and quality industrials rotating into favor. The one nagging cross-current is valuation-narrative fragility: at $1,070 vs a modeled ~$415 fair value, the story is stretched, and any macro wobble or aerospace/industrial order softening could snap the multiple. But that is a latent risk, not an active pressure - right now the tape, the print, and the narrative are all pushing the same direction. Analyst tone is almost certain to chase with target hikes into this, adding another leg.
Verify before trusting this (5)
- Analyst target revisions in the next 1-2 weeks - magnitude and breadth of upgrades
- Whether the post-gap follow-through holds or fades (a failed breakout would flip the read fast)
- Aerospace order commentary from peers (GE, HON, RTX) confirming the 'broader recovery' story
- Any crack in the industrial-cycle narrative - PMI, short-cycle orders
- VIX behavior and S&P proximity to highs - a risk-off flip would hit this beta hard
This lens hasn't been run for this ticker yet.
When we made this prediction on Aug 7, 2026, PH was $1,069.80. We expect it to be $945.00 by Feb 2027, and we consider it great value under $850.00. This is an early model (v0.6.0) — the direction is more reliable than the exact price. Made Aug 7, 2026.
Blue is our prediction, starting the day we made it. Grey is a slower route to the same place — the same destination, taking longer. Black is the actual price, so you can see how we are doing.