Seagate Technology Holdings plc (STX)
Information Technology · Technology Hardware, Storage & Peripherals · US stock · S&P 500 component
$642.14
▼ -54.75 (7.86%)
Fair valueFair
$556 −13.5% to fair value
$278fair band $473–$674$834
Day's range
$629.00 – $672.77
52-week range
$209.00 – $1,145.00
Red flags⚠ Heavy dilution⚠ Heavy dilution⚠ Heavy dilution⚠ Heavy dilution⚠ Heavy dilution
About Seagate Technology Holdings plc
Seagate Technology designs and manufactures data storage products, mainly hard disk drives used in data centers, personal computers, surveillance systems and consumer devices. Large cloud companies are among its important customers because they store vast amounts of data. The company earns money by selling drives, and results depend on demand for storage capacity, pricing, product mix and the success of higher capacity technologies it develops.
Revenue for the last twelve months was $12.2 billion, and it grew by 18.2% a year over three years. The operating margin is 33.6%, and return on invested capital reached 81%. Net debt to EBITDA is 0.5 times. It pays a dividend with a yield of 0.5%. Its X-Ray Score is 56 out of 100. These figures describe past results and say nothing certain about the future.
Price chart
52-wk range $209.00 – $1,145.00Volume 5,763,985Daily, split-adjusted
Vitals
Market cap$147.1B
52-week range$209.00 – $1,145.00
Volume (last day)5,763,985
P/E (TTM)46.0
EBIT / EV yield2.7%
Free-cash-flow yield2.1%
Dividend yield0.5%
Revenue (TTM)$12.2B
Net income (TTM)$3.2B
Operating margin33.6%
Return on capital81.0%
Debt incl. leases$3.9B
Cash & securities$1.7B
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
$556middle half of models $492 – $622
Fair
−13.5% 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 $642
Undervalued < $473Fair $473 – $674Overvalued > $674
P/E multiple
$582
P/B multiple
$690
P/S multiple
$375
EV/EBITDA multiple
$532
EV/EBIT multiple
$478
EV/revenue multiple
$445
10-year DCF, EBITDA exit
$583
5-year DCF, EBITDA exit
$661
10-year DCF, revenue exit
$577
5-year DCF, revenue exit
$635
10-year DCF, growth exit · not used
$230
5-year DCF, growth exit · not used
$217
Dividend discount, stable · not used
$126
Dividend discount, multi-stage · not used
$143
Earnings power value · not used
$185
Growth the price implies
27.7%/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
Average 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
34/100
Expensive against its sector on earnings and cash flow.
See the numbers →
EBIT / EV yield2.7%
Free-cash-flow yield2.1%
Fair value vs price0.9×
Growth
Strong
75/100
Growing faster than most of its sector.
See the numbers →
Revenue growth (3y)18.2%
Growth consistency90%
Profitability
Fair
67/100
Returns on capital are typical for its sector.
See the numbers →
Return on invested capital81.0%
Operating margin33.6%
Gross profitability55.7%
Financial health
Fair
61/100
Balance sheet is in typical shape for its sector.
See the numbers →
Piotroski F-Score8 / 9
Net debt / EBITDA0.5×
Interest cover14.4×
Dividends
Weak
35/100
Dividend is modest or less certain than peers.
See the numbers →
Dividend yield0.5%
Dividends vs free cash flow22%
Dividend growth2.9%
Quarterly results: last 6 quarters
+30.5%
Mar '25
+29.5%
Jun '25
+21.3%
Oct '25
+21.5%
Jan '26
+44.1%
Apr '26
+48.5%
Jul '26
Revenue against the same quarter a year earlier. Latest quarter revenue $3.6B.
Compare with peers
SNDK Sandisk Corp73 SMCI Super Micro Computer,...58 NTAP NetApp, Inc.54 DELL Dell Technologies Inc.53Other Technology Hardware, Storage & Peripherals companies by X-Ray Score.
SWOT analysis: Seagate Technology Holdings plc
Strengthsinside the company
- Return on invested capital is 81.0%, against a median of 52.7% for industry peers.
- Operating margin of 33.6% is well above the 9.4% median of industry peers, a sign of pricing power or lower costs.
- Revenue has grown 18.2% a year over three years (median 6.4% for industry peers).
- Operating profit covers interest 14x, so debt costs are a small drag.
Weaknessesinside the company
- No clear weakness in the figures we track.
Opportunitiesvaluation and setting
- Revenue growth picked up to 34.1% last year from 18.2% a year over three years.
- Our Market Compass rates the backdrop for Information Technology as favourable.
Threatsvaluation and setting
- Trades at 46.2x earnings, 78% above the 26.0x median of industry 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 STX with peers and sector
Medians of 9 Technology Hardware, Storage & Peripherals peers and of 74 Information Technology stocks in our universe.
Largest peers (X-Ray Score): AAPL 53, DELL 53, SNDK 73, WDC 52, HPE 45, NTAP 54.
| Metric | STX | Peers | Sector |
|---|---|---|---|
| X-Ray Score (out of 100) | 56 | 53 | 50 |
| Valuation | 34 | 59 | 52 |
| Growth | 75 | 59 | 54 |
| Profitability | 67 | 52 | 49 |
| Financial health | 61 | 51 | 49 |
| Dividends | 35 | 47 | 51 |
Sector leaders: highest X-Ray Score in Information Technology
STX ranks #28 of 75 in Information Technology and #3 of 10 in Technology Hardware, Storage & Peripherals 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 STX
Each factor is rated by where STX 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: 9 Good · 6 Average · 7 Bad of 22
Growth: 2 · 0 · 0
Profitability: 4 · 0 · 1
Financial strength: 1 · 3 · 0
Valuation: 0 · 0 · 5
Cash flow: 1 · 2 · 1
Efficiency: 1 · 1 · 0
| Factor | STX | Rating | Sector median | Own 5-year median | Against own history |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Growth | |||||
| Revenue growth, 3 years a year | +18.2% | Good beats 79% | +9.7% | – | – |
| Revenue growth, last year | +34.1% | Good beats 86% | +13.7% | +9.2% | ▲ Better |
| Profitability | |||||
| Gross margin | 45.6% | Bad beats 27% | 57.8% | 29.7% | ▲ Better |
| Operating margin | 33.6% | Good beats 75% | 20.3% | 16.8% | ▲ Better |
| Net margin | 26.1% | Good beats 70% | 17.8% | 14.1% | ▲ Better |
| Return on invested capital | 81.0% | Good beats 91% | 19.4% | – | – |
| Return on equity | 146.9% | Good beats 98% | 21.0% | – | – |
| Financial strength | |||||
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.5x | Average beats 64% | 0.8x | 2.1x | ▲ Better |
| Interest cover | 14.4x | Average beats 43% | 23.0x | 5.9x | ▲ Better |
| Current ratio | 1.67 | Average beats 55% | 1.57 | 1.13 | ▲ Better |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 / 9 | Good beats 89% | 6 / 9 | – | – |
| Valuation | |||||
| P/E ratio | 46.2x | Bad beats 27% | 33.6x | 39.9x | ▼ Worse |
| Price / book | 67.9x | Bad beats 4% | 8.3x | – | – |
| Price / sales | 12.1x | Bad beats 25% | 6.9x | 3.3x | ▼ Worse |
| EV / EBITDA | 34.2x | Bad beats 31% | 24.7x | 36.6x | ≈ In line |
| Free cash flow yield | 2.1% | Bad beats 30% | 3.4% | 3.0% | ≈ In line |
| Cash flow | |||||
| Free cash flow margin | 25.5% | Average beats 57% | 22.3% | 10.1% | ▲ Better |
| Cash from operations / net income | 1.15 | Bad beats 33% | 1.39 | 1.08 | ≈ In line |
| Free cash flow growth, 3 years a year | +70.5% | Good beats 91% | +15.4% | – | – |
| Accruals (lower is better) | −4.9% | Average beats 57% | −4.4% | – | – |
| Efficiency | |||||
| Inventory turnover | 4.2x | Average beats 63% | 3.9x | 4.2x | ≈ In line |
| Days sales outstanding | 46 days | Good beats 78% | 63 days | 38 days | ▼ Worse |
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
● 6 Good · ● 8 Average · ● 1 BadCash quality
Earnings backed by cashAverage
Free-cash-flow yieldBad
Risk models
Altman Z''Average
Piotroski F-ScoreGood
Growth
Free-cash-flow growth (3y)Good
Revenue growth (3y)Good
Growth consistencyAverage
Balance sheet
Current ratioAverage
Net debt / EBITDAAverage
Interest coverAverage
Valuation
Fair value vs priceAverage
EBIT / EV yieldAverage
Profitability
Return on invested capitalGood
Operating marginGood
Gross profitabilityGood
Each check is graded against the company's sector, not a fixed number. Checklist score 60/100.
Financials
| FY22 | FY23 | FY24 | FY25 | FY26 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $11.7B | $7.4B | $6.6B | $9.1B | $12.2B |
| Operating income | $2.0B | −$342M | $452M | $1.9B | $4.1B |
| Net income | $1.6B | −$529M | $335M | $1.5B | $3.2B |
| Operating cash flow | $1.7B | $942M | $918M | $1.1B | $3.7B |
| Operating margin | 16.8% | -4.6% | 6.9% | 20.8% | 33.6% |
| Free cash flow | $1.3B | $626M | $664M | $818M | $3.1B |
| Diluted EPS | $7.36 | $-2.56 | $1.58 | $6.77 | $13.90 |
Fiscal years, from SEC filings.
Technical summary
Daily
Strongly bearish
3 bullish · 1 neutral · 12 bearish
Weekly
Neutral
5 bullish · 1 neutral · 6 bearish
Monthly
Bullish
5 bullish · 1 neutral · 2 bearish
Moving averages (daily)
| SMA 10 | 700.2 | Bearish |
| EMA 10 | 703.8 | Bearish |
| SMA 20 | 787.3 | Bearish |
| EMA 20 | 751.9 | Bearish |
| SMA 50 | 828.5 | Bearish |
| EMA 50 | 802.8 | Bearish |
| SMA 100 | 858.0 | Bearish |
| EMA 100 | 791.8 | Bearish |
| SMA 200 | 681.0 | Bearish |
| EMA 200 | 687.9 | Bearish |
Oscillators (daily)
| RSI (14) | 32.78 | Neutral |
| MACD (12, 26) | -53.80 | Bearish |
| Momentum (12) | -20.29 | Bearish |
| Stochastic %K (14) | 4.80 | Bullish |
| Williams %R (14) | -95.20 | Bullish |
| CCI (20) | -106.8 | Bullish |
Pivot points (classic, last session)
S3 579.4 | S2 604.2 | S1 623.2 | Pivot 648.0 | R1 666.9 | R2 691.7 | R3 710.7 |
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.
Dividends
Paid, last 12 months
2.96 USD
Yield on today's price
0.46%
Frequency
Quarterly
Next ex-dividend date
Not announced
| Ex-dividend date | Amount per share |
|---|---|
| 0.7400 | |
| 0.7400 | |
| 0.7400 | |
| 0.7400 | |
| 0.7200 | |
| 0.7200 | |
| 0.7200 | |
| 0.7200 | |
| 0.7000 | |
| 0.7000 | |
| 0.7000 | |
| 0.7000 |
Ex-dividend dates and amounts from EODHD. Shown as declared, before tax.
ETFs that hold STX
| ETF | Share of the fund |
|---|---|
| IGPT Invesco AI and Next Gen Software | 3.18% |
| ARTY iShares Future AI & Tech | 2.80% |
| ROCQ JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Yield | 2.74% |
| AIS VistaShares Artificial Intelligence Su... | 2.67% |
| TRFK Pacer Data and Digital Revolution | 2.43% |
| VOT Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth | 2.38% |
| QTEC First Trust NASDAQ-100-Technology Sect... | 2.30% |
| MTUM iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor | 2.21% |
The eight funds with the largest weight in STX 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.
STX SEC filings
8-KSEC EDGAR
Regulation FD disclosure; Other events
DEF 14ASEC EDGAR
Proxy statement
8-KSEC EDGAR
Director or officer change
10-KSEC EDGAR
Annual report
8-KSEC EDGAR
Results of operations; Regulation FD disclosure
8-KSEC EDGAR
Regulation FD disclosure; Other events
8-KSEC EDGAR
Regulation FD disclosure; Other events
8-KSEC EDGAR
Regulation FD disclosure; Other events
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.