ALLIENT INC (ALNT) Stock Analysis
ALLIENT INC
▾ What's in the 52/100 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 ALNT (regulated utility)
A regulator sets what a utility can earn, so its value tracks book value, dividend yield and payout — not a free-market DCF.
-
1
Utility lens (P/B, yield, payout) ↓
These are the metrics utility-fund managers actually use.
Is now a good time to buy ALNT?
Macro: Neutral / mid-cycle
ALNT trades at $111.41 vs an estimated
intrinsic value
of $33.31
— a +234.4% premium to model IV.
Today's price is consistent with ALNT's owner-earnings free cash flow per share growing about 24.5% per year over the next 5 years (the
price-implied growth rate).
Our DCF projects
modeled growth
of 8.8% per year based on history + sector defaults
(analyst consensus estimates not yet integrated).
Note: this is a 5-year, per-share view. The Reverse-DCF section below asks the same question on a stricter 10-year free-cash-flowFree Cash Flow (FCF) — Operating cash flow minus capital spending: cash left after a company covers operating costs, taxes and interest and reinvests in the business — but BEFORE repaying debt principal or paying dividends. The cash actually available to investors.
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 → basis — so its growth number is different, not contradictory.
▾ Exactly how this 5-year figure is computed
Current price: $111.41 (live)
Discount rate: 13.5%; terminal growth: 3.0%
Forecast: 5 years explicit growth, then a linear fade to terminal; end-of-period cash flows discounted to today
Growth path: the model's probability-weighted scenarios (conservative 40% / base 35% / optimistic 25%) — see the "Three Scenarios, Weighted" table below for the three IVs
Method: solve for the constant 5-year per-share growth rate that, run through this same structure, makes the intrinsic value equal today's price. (The 10-year figure below uses a flat 10-yr path instead — hence a different number.)
Not investment advice. The model can be wrong. Verify the assumptions in the sections below and consider consulting a licensed advisor for significant decisions.
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: 13.5% (the rate the model used)
Price used: $111.41 — 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.
Few companies sustain 18-25% CAGR for a decade. A handful of historical compounders did — typically while still relatively small. Achieving this at mega-cap scale (\$500B+) is dramatically harder because the base is already enormous.
For reference: Exceptional is not a compliment here — sustaining mid-teens cash-flow growth for ten straight years is rare at scale. The price is betting on a top-tier outcome.
▾ How we computed this · Reality check thresholds · Assumptions
- Starting FCF/share: $2.76 (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 →: 13.5% — 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: broad market average (sector unknown). See the Peer Basket section below for the peer comparison and its limited-comparables caveat.
⚠ We found only 2 genuine same-industry (Instruments For Meas & Testing of Electricity & Elec Signals) comparables — fewer than the 4 we require for a reliable median. The 8 names in the table below therefore include 6 broader Healthcare 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 ALNT stack up against its closest peers?
Ideally we compare ALNT 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 → |
3.0x / 6.2x / 17.3x |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| COHU | COHU INC | Instruments For Meas & Tes | $2.5B | 6.2x | — | — | 1.3% |
| AEHR | AEHR TEST SYSTEMS | Instruments For Meas & Tes | $2.9B | 49.2x | 121.3x | — | 0.3% |
| ZYME | Zymeworks Inc. | Pharmaceuticals ·fallback | $1.8B | 17.3x | — | — | 3.7% |
| VRDN | Viridian Therapeutics, Inc.\DE | Pharmaceuticals ·fallback | $1.8B | 25.6x | — | — | 2.5% |
| TYRA | Tyra Biosciences, Inc. | Pharmaceuticals ·fallback | $1.9B | — | — | — | — |
| UFPT | UFP TECHNOLOGIES INC | Medical Devices ·fallback | $1.7B | 3.0x | 10.8x | 19.9x | 4.8% |
| VCEL | Vericel Corp | Biotechnology ·fallback | $1.7B | 6.2x | 8.3x | 154.1x | 3.3% |
| TSHA | Taysha Gene Therapies, Inc. | Biotechnology ·fallback | $1.7B | 177.7x | — | — | 0.1% |
Regulated rate-base economics
Regulated utilities earn a state-approved "allowed ROE" (typically 9-10%) on their regulated rate base. The business is engineered for stability — DCF can't price that properly because earnings are administratively set, not free-market. The right metrics are P/B, dividend yield, and payout ratio — what most utility-fund managers actually look at.
Note: For utilities, ROE comfortably above the regulator's allowed ROE (~9-10%) is the sign of operational efficiency. Big premium to book (>2×) generally requires accelerating rate-base growth — common drivers: grid modernization, renewables transition, or population/load growth in service area.
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 →
Regulated utilities carry high leverage backed by long-life assets and regulator-set rate-base returns — Altman Z flags both as distress signals even when the business is stable. See the Utility Lens above for the metrics that matter (P/B, dividend yield, payout ratio).
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 →
Piotroski F's checks (operating cash flow, gross-margin trend, current ratio, asset turnover) assume an industrial cost structure, so they misread asset-heavy or financial businesses like this one — a healthy REIT, utility, pipeline, BDC/fund or holding company can score low for reasons that aren't weakness. See the sector lens above for the metrics that actually matter.
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 13.5%, the figure our model used for ALNT. 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 $33.31. A small gap is rounding; a large one would be a data problem — and we check for it below.
13.5% — 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 1.64. 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 13.5% — the beta-based rate. Drag the slider to the other rate to see the full range.
+234.4%
At the default assumptions the flat path lands near our published value of $33.31. Move any slider to recompute it with your own.
—
⚙ Advanced — tinker with every input (beta, growth, rate path, margin → full intrinsic value)
ALNT is deeply overvalued, trading at a premium of +137.6% 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 →. The market is paying up for its consistent profitability, with net income positive for 5/5 years and operating cash flow positive for 5/5 years, alongside expanding gross margins. The primary quantifiable risk is the significant divergence between the implied growth of 24.5% and the historical 4-year revenue growth of 8.3%/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.
- Acceleration in quarterly revenue growth rates
- Further expansion of gross margin percentage
- Stabilization or reduction in long-term debt
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.
- Revenue grew +5% to $554.5M.
- Free cash flow rose to $46.3M.
- Gross margin improved to 33% (+2 pts).
- Net income grew +67% to $22.0M.
Nothing clearly worsening year-over-year.
Management & Leadership
Limited executive data available. Allient Inc. is a relatively smaller company, and specific executive details beyond the CEO are not widely publicized in a structured format. The CEO is Richard D. Warzala, who has led the company for a significant period.
What They Make
Allient Inc. designs, manufactures, and markets a range of precision and specialty motion control products and solutions, primarily serving industrial, medical, and aerospace customers.
End Markets
Revenue Drivers
Why Is It Priced Like This?
Why Customers Pay
The market prices ALNT at a premium of +137.6% due to its consistent financial health, evidenced by net income being positive for 5/5 years and operating cash flow positive for 5/5 years. Investors are likely valuing the company's expanding gross margin, which has grown from 30% to 32.8%, indicating improved operational efficiency and pricing power.
Three Scenarios, Weighted
| Scenario | IV | vs Price | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|
| Conservative | $29.03 | -73.9% | 40% |
| Base | $33.84 | -69.6% | 35% |
| Optimistic | $39.42 | -64.6% | 25% |
| Weighted | $33.31 | -70.1% | 100% |
What has to be true (historical comparison)
To justify today's price, ALNT's owner-earnings cash flow must grow to roughly 3.0× its current level over 5 years. If profit margins and share count stay roughly constant, that is equivalent to about the same multiple of revenue. Each card below is a real company that grew revenue at a comparable magnitude — possibly in a different industry; the point is the growth magnitude required and its historical base rate, not that ALNT resembles these businesses. The green/amber line shows whether that company cleared or fell short of the bar, and the tag on the right shows how it actually fared afterward (succeeded, faded, or wiped out).
A GPU company priced for gaming. The data-center business was 6% of revenue. Ten years later the data-center business is 80% of revenue and the company 200x'd.
Picks-and-shovels for the internet. Real business, real profits, but priced at 200x earnings. Took 20+ years to make a new all-time high. Revenue grew only 4x in 20 years.
Lost $720M on $1.6B revenue. The market priced in dominance of online retail. Took 9 years for the share price to make a new high but ultimately compounded 170x in revenue.
Anchors are hand-curated 10-K snapshots. We surface the three whose 5-year revenue growth most-closely brackets the rate required to justify the current price. Source: SEC EDGAR.
Business Model & Valuation
How They Make Money
The company's long-term debt is rising from $159M to $180M, suggesting it funds growth or operations partly through debt, though specific dividend or buyback rates are not provided.
Free Cash Flow DCF High
Standard FCF DCF: positive free cash flow in a sector suited for cash-flow-based valuation.
Show advanced inputs
| RevenueGrowth | 8.3% |
| EpsGrowth | -5.6% |
| HistoricalFcfGrowth | 83.2% |
| SectorDefault | 10.0% |
| BestEstimate | 8.8% |
| Method | blend(70% revenue_cagr, 30% sector) |
| 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 8.3%/yr over four years, increasing from $404M to $554M.
Geography & Markets
Allient Inc. is headquartered in the US and operates globally, serving customers across various international markets. Specific geographic revenue 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)67.5NeutralMomentum 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 →BullishLine above signalThe fast trend is above the slow trend — short-term momentum is currently upward.
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 (1 notes — click to expand/collapse)
Guardrail Notes (1)
- Illiquidity discount 7% applied (small/micro-cap — harder to exit, demand a margin).
FINANCIALS
Financial Statements (5-year tables — click to expand)
From ALLIENT INC's SEC filings (EDGAR).
Income (5yr)
| Year | Revenue | Net Income | EPS |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 554.5M | 22.0M | $1.32 |
| 2024 | 530.0M | 13.2M | $0.79 |
| 2023 | 578.6M | 24.1M | $1.48 |
| 2022 | 503.0M | 17.4M | $1.09 |
| 2021 | 403.5M | 24.1M | $1.66 |
Cash Flow (5yr)
| Year | Operating CF | CapEx | − SBC & adj. | Free Cash Flow |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 56.7M | 7.0M | 3.4M | 46.3M |
| 2024 | 41.9M | 9.7M | 4.1M | 28.0M |
| 2023 | 45.0M | 11.6M | 5.5M | 28.0M |
| 2022 | 5.6M | 15.9M | 5.1M | -15.4M |
| 2021 | 25.4M | 13.7M | 4.2M | 7.5M |
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: 56.7M − 7.0M − 3.4M (SBC & adj.) = 46.3M. This is the same owner-earnings FCF definition the valuation model uses.
Balance Sheet
| Total Assets | 577.6M |
| Total Liabilities | 276.1M |
| Equity | 301.5M |
| Total Debt | 180.4M |