ESAB vs KITT

ESAB Corporation vs Nauticus Robotics, Inc. — Valuation Comparison 2026

ESAB

General Industrial Machinery & Equipment, NEC
ESAB Corporation
Quality
8.7
out of 10
Value Trap
30
LOW
Price
$92.43
Last close
Models
12/13
Active
VS

KITT

General Industrial Machinery & Equipment, NEC
Nauticus Robotics, Inc.
Quality
3.3
out of 10
Value Trap
37
LOW
Price
$1.80
Last close
Models
3/13
Active

Model-by-Model Comparison

ModelType ESAB Fair ValueESAB Upside KITT Fair ValueKITT Upside
Bayesian DCF Intrinsic $19.61 -78.8%
Earnings Power Value Intrinsic $29.58 -68.0%
EROIC Spread Intrinsic $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
First Chicago Scenario $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
Markov DDM Intrinsic $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
ML-RIV Intrinsic $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
Dynamic NAV Asset-Based $0.11 -93.9%
PWERM Option-Based $108.72 +17.6% $5.81 +222.7%
Regime Cross-Sectional Relative $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
Sentiment SOTP Hybrid $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
CUCE Ensemble Ensemble $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
FTNN Topology Relative $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
RCMH-DCF Intrinsic $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
🔒

Unlock Full 13-Model Comparison

Access all valuation models for ESAB vs KITT — including EROIC Spread, First Chicago, Markov DDM, PWERM, and 7 more.

Access Full Analysis — From $27/mo →

ESAB vs KITT — Which Stock Is More Undervalued?

ESAB scores higher with a 8.7/10 quality rating vs KITT's 3.3/10. Both stocks are analyzed daily using SEC EDGAR filings across 13 independent models.

Comparing ESAB Corporation (ESAB) and Nauticus Robotics, Inc. (KITT) across 13 institutional-grade valuation models reveals how each company's intrinsic value stacks up against its market price. CirclFi's engine processes SEC EDGAR 10-K and 10-Q filings, FRED macroeconomic data, and GDELT news sentiment to generate independent fair value estimates daily.

ESAB currently trades at $92.43 with a QOC of 8.7/10, while KITT trades at $1.80 with a QOC of 3.3/10.

Both companies are analyzed with models spanning intrinsic (Bayesian DCF, EPV), scenario-based (First Chicago), regime-switching (Markov DDM, RCMH-DCF), machine learning (ML-RIV, FTNN Topology), and ensemble methods (CUCE).