Coherent Corp. (COHR)
Information Technology · Electronic Components · US stock · S&P 500 component
$207.82
▼ -29.71 (12.51%)
Fair valueFair
$177 −14.8% to fair value
$89fair band $151–$215$266
Day's range
$204.38 – $224.56
52-week range
$112.96 – $440.00
Red flags⚠ Heavy dilution⚠ Heavy dilution⚠ Heavy dilution⚠ Heavy dilution⚠ Heavy dilution
About Coherent Corp.
Coherent makes lasers, optical components and engineered materials. Its products include optical transceivers and components that carry data in communications networks and data centres, industrial lasers used in cutting, welding and electronics manufacturing, and advanced materials such as silicon carbide substrates. Customers are communications equipment makers, cloud operators, semiconductor and electronics manufacturers and industrial companies. The business is organised into networking, materials and lasers groups.
Supplying optical products, lasers and materials to manufacturers and network companies produced revenue of $7.1 billion over the last twelve months. Sales have grown at 11.3% a year across the last three years. The operating margin is 11.9%, the business earns 6% on the capital invested in it, and net debt is 1.8 times EBITDA. A dividend is listed, though its yield is 0.0%. On the site's X-Ray Score it receives 32 out of 100.
Price chart
52-wk range $112.96 – $440.00Volume 12,490,822Daily, split-adjusted
Vitals
Market cap$40.6B
52-week range$112.96 – $440.00
Volume (last day)12,490,822
P/E (TTM)51.2
EBIT / EV yield2.0%
Free-cash-flow yield-2.5%
Dividend yield0.0%
Revenue (TTM)$7.1B
Net income (TTM)$787M
Operating margin11.9%
Return on capital6.1%
Debt incl. leases$3.5B
Cash & securities$2.0B
Debt = borrowings plus lease liabilities. Cash & securities = cash, equivalents and short-term marketable securities (long-term securities are not counted, so net cash can be understated for companies that hold large long-term investments). Net debt = debt minus cash & securities. Source: latest SEC 10-Q/10-K. EBIT / EV yield = operating profit divided by market cap plus net debt.
Fair value estimate
$177middle half of models $155 – $188
Fair
−14.8% to fair value
Average of the 10 valuation models that pass our checks: multiples, discounted cash flow, dividend discount and earnings power value. A model more than 100% above or 60% below the price is left out as unrealistic. Model uncertainty is High, based on how far apart the models are. Undervalued or Overvalued means the gap to fair value is more than 17.5%.
Peak-cycle earnings: the current operating margin is more than 1.5x its 7-year average, so multiples applied to today's profit may overstate value; model uncertainty is set to High
Price $208
Undervalued < $151Fair $151 – $215Overvalued > $215
P/E multiple
$236
P/B multiple
$161
P/S multiple
$149
EV/EBITDA multiple
$157
EV/EBIT multiple
$226
EV/revenue multiple
$163
10-year DCF, EBITDA exit
$155
5-year DCF, EBITDA exit
$188
10-year DCF, revenue exit
$150
5-year DCF, revenue exit
$187
10-year DCF, growth exit · not used
$20
5-year DCF, growth exit · not used
$37
Dividend discount, stable · not used
$5
Dividend discount, multi-stage · not used
$5
Earnings power value · not used
$45
Growth the price implies
45.3%/yr
A model estimate, not a price target or recommendation. Inputs: risk-free 5.13%, equity risk premium 4.30% (Damodaran). How it works.
What this means
Weak business, fairly priced
The price sits inside our fair-value band. A high score does not guarantee a good outcome; it shifts the odds a little. Use the checklist as a prompt for your own research.
Before you invest · decision checklist
Ticked boxes are filled in from our data; the rest are yours to answer.
The five-lens scan
Every score explained in one sentence, ranked against Information Technology peers. Open a lens to see the numbers behind it.
Strong: 70 to 100Fair: 50 to 69Weak: under 50No score: not enough data
Valuation
Weak
21/100
Expensive against its sector on earnings and cash flow.
See the numbers →
EBIT / EV yield2.0%
Free-cash-flow yield-2.5%
Fair value vs price0.9×
Growth
Fair
59/100
Growing at a typical pace for its sector.
See the numbers →
Revenue growth (3y)11.3%
Growth consistency90%
Profitability
Weak
16/100
Earns lower returns on its capital than most peers.
See the numbers →
Return on invested capital6.1%
Operating margin11.9%
Gross profitability14.6%
Financial health
Fair
50/100
Balance sheet is in typical shape for its sector.
See the numbers →
Piotroski F-Score6 / 9
Net debt / EBITDA1.8×
Interest coverNo interest cost
Dividends
Weak
7/100
Dividend is modest or less certain than peers.
See the numbers →
Dividend yield0.0%
Dividend growth-25.4%
Quarterly results: last 6 quarters
+23.9%
Mar '25
+16.4%
Jun '25
+17.3%
Sep '25
+17.5%
Dec '25
+20.5%
Mar '26
+33.7%
Jun '26
Revenue against the same quarter a year earlier. Latest quarter revenue $2.0B.
Compare with peers
APH Amphenol Corp66 GLW Corning Inc37Other Electronic Components companies by X-Ray Score.
SWOT analysis: Coherent Corp.
Strengthsinside the company
- Revenue has grown 11.3% a year over three years (median 9.5% for sector peers).
- Operating profit covers interest 50x, so debt costs are a small drag.
Weaknessesinside the company
- Return on invested capital of 6.1% is well below the 19.7% median of sector peers.
- Operating margin of 11.9% is thin against 21.7% for sector peers.
- Free cash flow is negative, so spending or debt has to be financed from outside.
Opportunitiesvaluation and setting
- Revenue growth picked up to 22.5% last year from 11.3% a year over three years.
- Our Market Compass rates the backdrop for Information Technology as favourable.
Threatsvaluation and setting
- Trades at 51.6x earnings, 56% above the 33.0x median of sector peers, so the price already assumes better results.
- Valuation uncertainty is high: the models give widely different values, so the fair value range is wide.
- Our checks raised: Heavy dilution; Heavy dilution.
Written by fixed rules from the figures on this page and the peer table below: filings, our fair value, the sector climate and the price trend. It summarises the data, it is not a forecast or advice.
Compare COHR with peers and sector
Medians of 74 Information Technology peers and of 74 Information Technology stocks in our universe.
Largest peers (X-Ray Score): NVDA 67, AAPL 53, MSFT 61, AVGO 60, MU 79, AMD 48.
| Metric | COHR | Peers | Sector |
|---|---|---|---|
| X-Ray Score (out of 100) | 32 | 50 | 50 |
| Valuation | 21 | 52 | 52 |
| Growth | 59 | 54 | 54 |
| Profitability | 16 | 50 | 50 |
| Financial health | 50 | 49 | 49 |
| Dividends | 7 | 51 | 51 |
Sector leaders: highest X-Ray Score in Information Technology
COHR ranks #71 of 75 in Information Technology by X-Ray Score. A higher score is stronger on our five pillars; it is a ranking of facts, not a forecast.
Green means better than the peer median, red worse (only where a higher or lower figure is clearly better). A dash means too few companies report the figure. P/E, EV/EBITDA and price changes are not graded: a different level is not good or bad by itself.
Factor ratings for COHR
Each factor is rated by where COHR stands among the 75 Information Technology stocks in our universe.
Rating against the sector
Goodthe top third of these stocks
Averagethe middle third of these stocks
Badthe bottom third of these stocks
"Beats" is the share of those stocks it is ahead of.
Against its own history
The last columns set today's figure against the company's own median of its last five financial years:
▲ Betterbetter than its usual level
▼ Worseworse than its usual level
≈ In linewithin its usual range
For valuation factors Good means cheaper than most of the sector and Better means cheaper than usual for this company, which is not the same as a bargain.
In total: 4 Good · 4 Average · 13 Bad of 21
Growth: 1 · 1 · 0
Profitability: 0 · 0 · 5
Financial strength: 2 · 1 · 1
Valuation: 1 · 1 · 3
Cash flow: 0 · 0 · 3
Efficiency: 0 · 1 · 1
| Factor | COHR | Rating | Sector median | Own 5-year median | Against own history |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Growth | |||||
| Revenue growth, 3 years a year | +11.3% | Average beats 59% | +9.7% | – | – |
| Revenue growth, last year | +22.5% | Good beats 74% | +13.7% | +22.5% | ≈ In line |
| Profitability | |||||
| Gross margin | 37.5% | Bad beats 14% | 57.8% | 35.2% | ≈ In line |
| Operating margin | 11.9% | Bad beats 26% | 20.3% | 2.0% | ▲ Better |
| Net margin | 11.1% | Bad beats 30% | 17.8% | 0.5% | ▲ Better |
| Return on invested capital | 6.1% | Bad beats 13% | 19.4% | – | – |
| Return on equity | 7.2% | Bad beats 14% | 21.0% | 0.5% | ▲ Better |
| Financial strength | |||||
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.8x | Bad beats 27% | 0.8x | 4.3x | ▲ Better |
| Interest cover | 50.0x | Good beats 75% | 23.0x | – | – |
| Current ratio | 2.43 | Good beats 75% | 1.57 | 2.72 | ▼ Worse |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 / 9 | Average beats 43% | 6 / 9 | – | – |
| Valuation | |||||
| P/E ratio | 51.6x | Bad beats 23% | 33.6x | 97.9x | ▲ Better |
| Price / book | 3.7x | Good beats 84% | 8.3x | 2.1x | ▼ Worse |
| Price / sales | 5.7x | Average beats 58% | 6.9x | 2.3x | ▼ Worse |
| EV / EBITDA | 50.1x | Bad beats 16% | 24.7x | 21.6x | ▼ Worse |
| Free cash flow yield | -2.5% | Bad beats 4% | 3.4% | 1.7% | ▼ Worse |
| Cash flow | |||||
| Free cash flow margin | -14.4% | Bad beats 3% | 22.3% | 3.3% | ▼ Worse |
| Cash from operations / net income | 0.10 | Bad beats 2% | 1.39 | 1.76 | ▼ Worse |
| Accruals (lower is better) | +3.9% | Bad beats 7% | −4.4% | – | – |
| Efficiency | |||||
| Inventory turnover | 1.7x | Bad beats 5% | 3.9x | 2.5x | ▼ Worse |
| Days sales outstanding | 69 days | Average beats 41% | 63 days | 66 days | ≈ In line |
These ratings compare companies with each other and describe the past; they are not a forecast, a recommendation or part of the X-Ray Score. A factor is left out when its data is missing or meaningless (for example a P/E on negative earnings). A dash in the history columns means fewer than three usable years.
Fundamentals checklist
● 2 Good · ● 4 Average · ● 8 BadCash quality
Earnings backed by cashBad
Free-cash-flow yieldBad
Risk models
Altman Z''Average
Piotroski F-ScoreAverage
Growth
Revenue growth (3y)Average
Growth consistencyAverage
Balance sheet
Current ratioGood
Net debt / EBITDABad
Interest coverGood
Valuation
Fair value vs priceBad
EBIT / EV yieldBad
Profitability
Return on invested capitalBad
Operating marginBad
Gross profitabilityBad
Each check is graded against the company's sector, not a fixed number. Checklist score 33/100.
Financials
| FY22 | FY23 | FY24 | FY25 | FY26 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $3.3B | $5.2B | $4.7B | $5.8B | $7.1B |
| Operating income | $414M | −$37M | $96M | $94M | $848M |
| Net income | $235M | −$259M | −$159M | $30M | $787M |
| Operating cash flow | $413M | $634M | $546M | $634M | $80M |
| Operating margin | 12.5% | -0.7% | 2.0% | 1.6% | 11.9% |
| Free cash flow | $99M | $198M | $199M | $193M | −$1.0B |
| Diluted EPS | $1.45 | $-2.93 | $-1.84 | $-0.52 | $4.12 |
Fiscal years, from SEC filings.
Technical summary
Daily
Bearish
4 bullish · 0 neutral · 12 bearish
Weekly
Strongly bearish
2 bullish · 1 neutral · 9 bearish
Monthly
Neutral
4 bullish · 1 neutral · 3 bearish
Moving averages (daily)
| SMA 10 | 254.7 | Bearish |
| EMA 10 | 249.7 | Bearish |
| SMA 20 | 283.5 | Bearish |
| EMA 20 | 269.4 | Bearish |
| SMA 50 | 290.3 | Bearish |
| EMA 50 | 288.6 | Bearish |
| SMA 100 | 315.7 | Bearish |
| EMA 100 | 297.0 | Bearish |
| SMA 200 | 295.3 | Bearish |
| EMA 200 | 278.0 | Bearish |
Oscillators (daily)
| RSI (14) | 29.70 | Bullish |
| MACD (12, 26) | -20.15 | Bearish |
| Momentum (12) | -38.58 | Bearish |
| Stochastic %K (14) | 2.50 | Bullish |
| Williams %R (14) | -97.50 | Bullish |
| CCI (20) | -150.0 | Bullish |
Pivot points (classic, last session)
S3 179.8 | S2 192.1 | S1 199.9 | Pivot 212.3 | R1 220.1 | R2 232.4 | R3 240.3 |
Signals describe what the chart is doing, not what to do. Moving averages: price above the average is bullish. Oscillators use the usual thresholds (RSI 30/70, Stochastic 20/80, CCI ±100, Williams %R −80/−20; MACD and momentum above zero are bullish). Weekly and monthly views use closing prices only.
ETFs that hold COHR
| ETF | Share of the fund |
|---|---|
| ULTY YieldMax Ultra Option Income Strategy | 3.44% |
| SOXQ Invesco PHLX Semiconductor | 2.48% |
| WTAI WisdomTree Artificial Intelligence and... | 1.73% |
| VOT Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth | 1.70% |
| SPHB Invesco S&P 500 High Beta | 1.53% |
| FDG American Century Focused Dynamic Growt... | 1.41% |
| CHAT Roundhill Generative AI & Technology | 1.35% |
| SCHM Schwab U.S. Mid-Cap | 1.26% |
The eight funds with the largest weight in COHR among the ETFs we cover, from each fund's latest SEC Form N-PORT (quarter-end positions, so they can be months old). All ETFs.
COHR stock splits
COHR has split its stock 4 times since 1995. The latest was a 2-for-1 split on 27 Jun 2011.
Full COHR stock split history →COHR SEC filings
DEF 14ASEC EDGAR
Proxy statement
8-KSEC EDGAR
Director or officer change; Other events
10-KSEC EDGAR
Annual report
8-KSEC EDGAR
Results of operations; Regulation FD disclosure
8-KSEC EDGAR
Results of operations; Regulation FD disclosure
10-QSEC EDGAR
Quarterly report
8-KSEC EDGAR
Director or officer change
8-KSEC EDGAR
Regulation FD disclosure
Where the numbers come from
Statements SEC EDGAR filings (10-K, 10-Q), quarters derived from year-to-date figures.
Prices end-of-day closes, split-adjusted.
Industry inputs beta, multiples and equity risk premium from Damodaran Online (NYU Stern).
StocksXray is for education only and is not financial advice. Scores and fair values are model estimates from public filings and carry uncertainty.