AXCELIS TECHNOLOGIES INC (ACLS) Stock Analysis
AXCELIS TECHNOLOGIES INC
▾ What's in the 65/100 risk score? (higher = riskier)
Contributions (weight × component score) sum to the total. This near-term score now includes fundamental health (leverage, FCF trend, DCF applicability). It excludes the the Altman Z score, whose retained-earnings input this filer does not report separately, which relies on a proxied (estimated) input. See the Financial Health section for the full balance-sheet read.
How to read ACLS
A profitable, cash-generating business — our discounted-cash-flow estimate is the primary lens, cross-checked against what growth the price implies and against peers.
-
1
The verdict + intrinsic value (our DCF) ↓
Our estimate of what a share is worth, versus today's price.
-
2
Reverse-DCF + the interactive calculator ↓
See the growth the price assumes, then flex every assumption yourself to pressure-test it.
-
3
Football field + peers ↓
A cross-check across methods and against comparable companies.
What growth must the market believe? Reverse DCF — Instead of asking "what is this stock worth?", asks "what growth rate is the current market price already assuming?"
Why it matters: It crystallizes the bull thesis as a single number you can argue with. If the market expects 40% growth for 10 years and you do not believe that, the stock is overvalued.
Reference: 10–15% = sustainable for strong companies · 20–25% = exceptional · 30%+ = historically very rare
Traditional DCF asks "what is this stock worth?" Reverse DCF flips it: it treats today's price as correct and solves for the growth rate that justifies it. In plain terms — if our model is right about everything else, the company's cash flow would have to grow (or shrink) by this much every year for the next 10 years for today's price to make sense. If that required growth looks unrealistic, the price is stretched; if it looks easy to beat, the price may be cheap.
Why it matters: A company can show big profits on paper while burning through cash. FCF is what actually fills the bank account.
Reference: Healthy mature businesses convert 8–15% of revenue into FCF · Growth companies often negative
Full explanation → must grow at:
▾ Exactly how this 10-year figure is computed
Forecast length: 10 years, single flat growth rate (no fade)
Terminal growth after year 10: 3.0%
Discount rate: 14.6% (the rate the model used)
Price used: $144.11 — the live price shown on this page (not frozen)
Method: solve for the constant annual growth rate that makes the discounted 10-year FCF stream + terminal value equal today's price.
25-35% sustained for 10 years has been done a few times but is historically very rare. The market is pricing in a near-best-case outcome.
For reference: Heroic — very few companies have ever compounded cash flow this fast at scale for a decade. The price leaves no room for error.
▾ How we computed this · Reality check thresholds · Assumptions
- Starting FCF/share: $2.72 (TTM)
- Discount RateDiscount Rate — The annual return you demand for taking single-stock risk instead of buying a safe Treasury or index fund.
Why it matters: Higher discount rate = stricter valuation (a stock has to produce more cash to be worth holding). Lower = more generous.
Reference: 8–12% is standard · 9–10% matches S&P 500 historical return · Below 7% is illogical for single-stock risk
Full explanation →: 14.6% — standard 8-12%; 9-10% matches S&P 500 historical return - Terminal Growth RateTerminal Growth Rate — The growth rate we assume the company holds forever, after the explicit 10-year forecast period ends.
Why it matters: It anchors the long-tail value. Cannot mathematically exceed long-term GDP growth or the company eventually becomes larger than the global economy.
Reference: 2–3% (matches long-term US GDP growth) · Above 4% is mathematically problematic
Full explanation →: 3.0% — matches long-term GDP growth - Forecast horizon: 10 years explicit + terminal perpetuity
| ≤ 0% | Priced for decline — likely undervalued OR dying business |
| 5-12% | Reasonable; sustainable for quality businesses |
| 12-18% | Demanding — strong execution required |
| 18-25% | Exceptional — few companies sustain for a decade |
| 25-35% | Heroic — historically very rare |
| 35%+ | Borderline impossible at scale |
Sustaining 30%+ cash-flow growth for a full decade at scale is exceedingly rare — the bar is brutally high.
Use the interactive calculator below to change the discount rate, growth and terminal-growth assumptions and watch the value move.
Football field: where does the price sit?
Different valuation methods produce different fair-value ranges depending on assumptions. Plotting them together lets you see at a glance whether the current price is reasonable across approaches, or only one specific lens.
Industry multiples sourced from: sector: Industrials. See the Peer Basket section below for the peer comparison and its limited-comparables caveat.
⚠ We found only 3 genuine same-industry (Special Industry Machinery) comparables — fewer than the 4 we require for a reliable median. The 8 names in the table below therefore include 5 broader Industrials names marked fallback, whose business models and margins differ — which is why any median below is computed over that wider set, not over true comparables. So we do not derive a peer-implied share value here. Read the multiples as rough context only.
How does ACLS stack up against its closest peers?
Ideally we compare ACLS only to same-industry peers, but too few exist in our universe right now, so the basket below mixes in broader-sector names. Treat the multiples as rough context, not a valuation. For a leveraged business, EV/EBIT and FCF yield (both in the table) are usually more reliable than EV/Sales, because revenue multiples ignore differences in margins and debt.
▾ What's "EV / Sales" in plain English?
EV (Enterprise Value) = market cap + total debt − cash. It's "what you'd pay to buy the entire company outright" — you pay the market cap to shareholders and take over their debt, but you keep their cash. EV is fairer than market cap alone because it includes the debt the new owner inherits.
EV / Sales = EV ÷ annual revenue. So "2.5×" means investors pay $2.50 of enterprise value per $1 of yearly sales. Higher = market is paying more per dollar of sales (usually because they expect future growth or fat margins).
p25 / median / p75 are the 25th, 50th (middle), and 75th percentile of the peers' multiples. Half the peers fall between p25 and p75. The median (p50) is the typical peer — that's the benchmark we compare to.
| EV / SalesEV / Sales — For every $1 of yearly revenue, this is how many dollars investors pay to own the whole business (including debt). Why it matters: Works for pre-profit growth companies where P/E and FCF don't apply. The most apples-to-apples cross-company multiple because it ignores accounting choices. Reference: 1–3x for mature companies · 4–10x for software/SaaS · 10–20x for hypergrowth · >20x is rare and demanding Full explanation → |
0.8x / 3.6x / 5.6x |
| EV / Gross ProfitEV / Gross Profit — Enterprise value divided by gross profit — the multiple paid for what each dollar of sales contributes after direct costs. Why it matters: More refined than EV/Sales for high-margin businesses (software, marketplaces) where gross margin is the real economic engine. Reference: 8–15x for SaaS · 15–25x for hypergrowth software · >30x demanding Full explanation → |
5.8x / 9.4x / 14.1x |
| EV / EBITEV / EBITDA — Enterprise value divided by earnings before interest, tax, depreciation, and amortization. Why it matters: A classic "what would a private buyer pay" multiple — used in M&A. Strips out tax and capital-structure noise. Reference: 8–12x for mature businesses · 15–25x for growth · Below 5x often signals distress Full explanation → |
16.3x / 20.3x / 44.7x |
Bold middle number = median peer. Half the peers trade above it, half below. Computed over 8 peers (broad — see caveat); implausible multiples excluded.
⚠️ Important caveat: peer multiples only work if the peers are genuinely comparable. Always check the peer list below — if the auto-picker grabbed micro-caps or unrelated businesses, the comparison is noise. A medical-device giant priced against tiny biotech startups won't produce a useful signal.
▾ View peer list (8)
| Ticker | Company | Industry | Mcap | EV/Sales | EV/GP | EV/EBIT | FCF Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| KAI | KADANT INC | Special Industry Machinery | $3.8B | 3.6x | — | 24.0x | 3.8% |
| ACMR | ACM Research, Inc. | Special Industry Machinery | $5.8B | 6.7x | 15.1x | 55.2x | 1.6% |
| VECO | VEECO INSTRUMENTS INC | Special Industry Machinery | $3.5B | 5.6x | 14.1x | 104.9x | 1.3% |
| JBTM | JBT MAREL Corp | Special Industry Machinery ·fallback | $7.0B | 2.2x | — | 44.7x | 3.1% |
| UFPI | UFP INDUSTRIES INC | Lumber ·fallback | $4.6B | 0.8x | 4.5x | 13.2x | 10.0% |
| TREX | TREX CO INC | Lumber & Wood Products ·fallback | $4.3B | 3.7x | 9.4x | 16.7x | 2.3% |
| VSEC | VSE CORP | Engineering Services ·fallback | $5.2B | 4.9x | — | 61.2x | 3.4% |
| TPC | TUTOR PERINI CORP | General Bldg Contractors - ·fallback | $3.8B | 0.7x | 5.8x | 16.3x | 9.5% |
Quality & solvency checks
Cheap stocks can be cheap for a reason. These screens warn when a low valuation comes paired with structural fragility.
Why it matters: Cheap-looking stocks (low P/E or P/B) often have low Z-scores because the market knows the company is dying. Z-score warns you before you fall into a value trap.
Reference: > 3.0 = safe zone · 1.81–3.0 = grey zone · < 1.81 = distress zone
Full explanation →
We can't produce a trustworthy Altman Z here: retained earnings weren't separately reported in our data, so a core input would have to be fabricated. Rather than show a categorical "distress" verdict from an invented number, we mark it unavailable. Judge financial health from the leverage, cash position, and the measurable Piotroski checks instead.
Why it matters: High score = fundamentals improving. Low score = deteriorating. Especially powerful for filtering cheap stocks: cheap + high F-score historically outperforms; cheap + low F-score is often a value trap.
Reference: 7–9 = strong · 4–6 = mediocre · 0–3 = weak
Full explanation →
▾ The checks — what passed, what didn't (and what we couldn't measure)
-
✓ Positive net incomeNet income $120.2M in the latest year.
-
✓ Positive operating cash flowOperating cash flow $118.3M (was $140.8M the prior year).
-
✗ Cash flow backs up reported profitOperating cash flow $118.3M vs net income $120.2M.Why this matters: When cash generated exceeds reported earnings, profits are high-quality (not propped up by accruals or one-time items).
-
✗ Return on assets improvingReturn on assets 8.8% vs 14.9% a year ago.Why this matters: Is the company squeezing more profit out of each dollar of assets than last year? Rising = getting more efficient; falling = the opposite.
-
✓ Debt load (vs assets)Long-term debt is 0.0% of assets vs 0.0% a year ago ($0.0M now).
-
✗ Short-term liquidity (current ratio)Current ratio 4.77x vs 5.41x a year ago.Why this matters: The current ratio compares assets it can turn to cash within a year against bills due within a year. Below 1.0 means it may struggle to cover near-term obligations.
-
✓ Share count (dilution)Share count declined 3.2% (32.7M → 31.7M year-over-year), so the no-dilution check passed. (This 1-year change differs from the ~4%/yr multi-year buyback CAGR the DCF cites.)
-
✓ Pricing power (gross margin)Gross margin 44.9% vs 44.7% a year ago.
-
✗ Sales per asset (asset turnover)Asset turnover 0.62x vs 0.75x a year ago.Why this matters: Asset turnover measures how much revenue each dollar of assets generates. Rising = more productive use of the asset base.
Missing data is never counted as a pass or a fail — it's shown as n/a and excluded from the denominator. Each check compares the company against its own prior year.
What if you assume different inputs?
Here's where we land — and what happens if you change the assumptions. Drag the sliders to set your own Discount RateDiscount Rate — The annual return you demand for taking single-stock risk instead of buying a safe Treasury or index fund.
Why it matters: Higher discount rate = stricter valuation (a stock has to produce more cash to be worth holding). Lower = more generous.
Reference: 8–12% is standard · 9–10% matches S&P 500 historical return · Below 7% is illogical for single-stock risk
Full explanation → (the annual return you demand for single-stock risk) and terminal growth; the value updates live so you can see whether the stock looks cheaper or richer. The discount rate starts at 14.6%, the figure our model used for ACLS. Open Advanced to also change beta, growth and the rate path.
Note: at default inputs this calculator mirrors the headline model's three-scenario weighting (conservative/base/optimistic, 40/35/25), so its opening value should land close to the headline intrinsic value of $30.66. A small gap is rounding; a large one would be a data problem — and we check for it below.
14.6% — beta-based (CAPM), from this stock's BetaBeta — How much the stock moves when the overall market moves. 1.0 = moves with the market; 1.5 = moves 50% more than the market.
Why it matters: Higher beta = more volatile = should demand higher discount rate. Low beta stocks (utilities, consumer staples) move less.
Reference: Most stocks 0.5–1.5 · Defensives ~0.3 · High-vol tech ~1.5–2.0
Full explanation → of 1.83. The safe Treasury rate plus a premium scaled by how much more (or less) volatile the stock is than the market.
9.5% — sector/quality tier. A simpler hurdle set by industry and business durability: lower for stable, wide-moat companies; higher for speculative or micro-caps.
The headline value and this calculator start at 14.6% — the beta-based rate. Drag the slider to the other rate to see the full range.
+370.0%
At the default assumptions the flat path lands near our published value of $30.66. Move any slider to recompute it with your own.
—
⚙ Advanced — tinker with every input (beta, growth, rate path, margin → full intrinsic value)
ACLS is deeply overvalued by the model, trading at a premium of +390.6% to its intrinsic valueIntrinsic Value — Our DCF model's estimate of what each share is mathematically worth based on projected cash flows.
Why it matters: Compare to current price. Below IV = potentially undervalued. Above IV = priced for growth that must actually happen.
Reference: Model-derived; quality depends on data and assumptions.
Full explanation →. The market appears to be paying for significant future growth beyond the modeled 8.0% per year, potentially driven by optionality in advanced semiconductor manufacturing. The primary quantifiable risk is the implied growth rate of 40.5%, which is substantially higher than the historical revenue growth of 6.1%/yr.
As of 2 months ago
Anatomy of a share
What you're buying per share. Bars are at the same scale so you can see the relative size of revenue, costs, cash flow, and debt — not just read them in a table.
What's free cash flow / what do these mean?
Revenue per share — how much the business earns from customers, divided by the number of shares outstanding. Top of the income statement.
Earnings per share — profit left after operating costs, interest, and taxes, per share. Two versions appear on this page and are not interchangeable: GAAP diluted EPS uses the company's weighted-average diluted share count during the reporting period (this is the "earnings" in "price-to-earnings"); net income per current share divides annual net income by today's share count. They differ whenever the share count has changed.
Owner-earnings free cash flow per share — the cash the business produces for shareholders. Savng's owner-earnings FCF subtracts capital expenditures and stock-based compensation from operating cash flow (SBC is a real dilution cost even though it's non-cash). This is deliberately more conservative than "standard" FCF, which subtracts only capital expenditures — so our figure is lower than the headline FCF you'll see elsewhere. FCF funds dividends, buybacks, debt repayment, and acquisitions; a company can report positive earnings yet negative FCF.
Debt per share — total interest-bearing borrowings divided by shares. High debt-per-share next to thin FCF-per-share is a fragility signal.
What you actually need to decide
Every stock price is a disagreement. Here's the single thing that must go right for the bulls, the single thing that breaks the thesis, and the concrete signposts to watch so you can update your view as real results arrive.
- Growth in new system orders and backlog
- Further expansion of gross margins
- Updates on market share in ion implantation
The trend, in plain numbers (2024 → 2025)
Straight from the financial statements — no model, no opinion. For a small or unprofitable company, the direction of these numbers usually tells you more than any single valuation.
Nothing clearly improving year-over-year.
- Revenue fell -18% to $839.0M.
- Free cash flow fell to $86.2M.
- Net income fell -40% to $120.2M.
Roughly flat: Gross margin held to 45% (+0 pts).
Management & Leadership
John T. Kurtz is the CEO and President of Axcelis Technologies, a role he has held since 2015. He also serves on the Board of Directors. Kevin J. Brewer is the Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer.
What They Make
Axcelis Technologies designs, manufactures, and services ion implantation equipment used in the fabrication of semiconductor chips. Their products are primarily sold to semiconductor manufacturers globally.
End Markets
Revenue Drivers
Why Is It Priced Like This?
Why Customers Pay
The market prices ACLS at a premium of +390.6% to the model's intrinsic valueIntrinsic Value — Our DCF model's estimate of what each share is mathematically worth based on projected cash flows.
Why it matters: Compare to current price. Below IV = potentially undervalued. Above IV = priced for growth that must actually happen.
Reference: Model-derived; quality depends on data and assumptions.
Full explanation →, likely anticipating substantial future growth and margin expansion. This optimism is supported by expanding gross margins (43.2% to 44.9%) and consistent positive net income and operating cash flow over the last five years, suggesting a healthy underlying business. The market may be assigning value to the company's role in enabling next-generation semiconductor technologies, which is not in the model.
Three Scenarios, Weighted
| Scenario | IV | vs Price | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|
| Conservative | $26.81 | -81.4% | 40% |
| Base | $31.14 | -78.4% | 35% |
| Optimistic | $36.16 | -74.9% | 25% |
| Weighted | $30.66 | -78.7% | 100% |
Business Model & Valuation
How They Make Money
Free Cash Flow DCF Medium
Standard FCF DCF: positive free cash flow in a sector suited for cash-flow-based valuation. High P/FCF (54x) - market pricing significant growth.
Show advanced inputs
| RevenueGrowth | 6.1% |
| EpsGrowth | 7.2% |
| HistoricalFcfGrowth | -9.7% |
| SectorDefault | 6.0% |
| BestEstimate | 6.1% |
| Method | blend(70% revenue_cagr, 30% sector)+buyback(2%) |
| GrowthBasis | total |
What this model does NOT do: this is a consolidated owner-earnings FCF model. Standalone segment assumptions: none. It does not project its revenue segments independently; their combined effect is embedded in the historical revenue and cash-flow trend the model extrapolates. The calculator above can only approximate a segment's impact through the single consolidated growth rate — it cannot model any one line separately. For a true segment-level view, build a separate model from the company's segment disclosures.
Maturity & Competitive Position
Moat Signals
Revenue has been growing at 6.1%/yr over four years, from $662M to $839M.
Geography & Markets
Axcelis Technologies is headquartered in the US and operates globally, serving semiconductor manufacturers across various regions including Asia, Europe, and North America. Specific geographic revenue mix percentages are not available from current data sources.
Geographic Risks
Market Signals
These are timing signals, not value signals — they describe the stock's recent price behavior, not what the business is worth. Use them for the "the thesis looks good, but is now the moment?" question. Each tile below explains what it's saying.
Why it matters: Short-term contrarian indicator. Extreme readings often precede mean reversion, though not always.
Reference: 30–70 normal · >70 overbought · <30 oversold
Full explanation → (14)52.9NeutralMomentum is balanced — neither overbought nor oversold.
Why it matters: When the fast line crosses above the slow line, short-term momentum is turning up; below, turning down. A timing cue, not a value signal.
Reference: Line above signal = bullish momentum · below = bearish
Full explanation →BearishLine below signalThe fast trend is below the slow trend — short-term momentum is currently downward.
Technicals describe price, not the business. A great company can have a "bearish" tape (a buying chance) and a weak one a "bullish" tape (a trap). Pair these with the valuation and health sections above.
QUALITY
Data Quality & Risk Flags (4 notes — click to expand/collapse)
Guardrail Notes (2)
- Per-share growth boosted by buybacks: the company is retiring 2% of its shares per year, which adds directly to per-share growth on top of business growth. Final per-share growth used by the model: 8%/yr.
- Price is 4.9x model IV - market may be pricing optionality, narrative catalysts, or margin expansion beyond what trailing cash flows support.
FINANCIALS
Financial Statements (5-year tables — click to expand)
From AXCELIS TECHNOLOGIES INC's SEC filings (EDGAR).
Income (5yr)
| Year | Revenue | Net Income | EPS |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 839.0M | 120.2M | $3.80 |
| 2024 | 1.0B | 201.0M | $6.15 |
| 2023 | 1.1B | 246.3M | $7.43 |
| 2022 | 920.0M | 183.1M | $5.46 |
| 2021 | 662.4M | 98.7M | $2.88 |
Cash Flow (5yr)
| Year | Operating CF | CapEx | − SBC & adj. | Free Cash Flow |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 118.3M | 11.3M | 20.8M | 86.2M |
| 2024 | 140.8M | 12.2M | 21.0M | 107.7M |
| 2023 | 156.9M | 20.7M | 18.3M | 117.9M |
| 2022 | 215.6M | 10.7M | 13.4M | 191.5M |
| 2021 | 150.2M | 8.7M | 12.1M | 129.4M |
How we define FCF: operating cash flow − capital expenditure − stock-based compensation (owner-earnings basis — SBC is a real cost to shareholders even though it's non-cash). Latest year: 118.3M − 11.3M − 20.8M (SBC & adj.) = 86.2M. This is the same owner-earnings FCF definition the valuation model uses.
Balance Sheet
| Total Assets | 1.4B |
| Total Liabilities | 326.7M |
| Equity | 1.0B |