See Bull Run's current pages for GE Vernova T&D India and Siemens Energy India. Related research includes Hitachi Energy India vs GE Vernova T&D India and Hitachi Energy India vs Siemens Energy India.

April–June 2026 scorecard

The growth rates are almost identical

GE Vernova T&D Q1 revenue increased approximately 38%.

Siemens Energy India revenue increased approximately 39.3%.

This makes the comparison unusually useful.

Neither company currently needs a weak competitor to appear fast-growing.

Both are benefiting from the same structural power-infrastructure boom.

The source of growth is different

GE Vernova T&D is executing equipment and projects across:

• 765 kV transformers and reactors;
• GIS and AIS switchgear;
• grid automation;
• FACTS;
• HVDC;
• substations;
• instrument transformers;
• international grid orders.

Siemens Energy India participates through:

• Power Transmission;
• large transformers;
• GIS and substations;
• grid stabilization;
• steam and gas turbines;
• industrial generation;
• service and modernization.

GE Vernova is the more concentrated grid bet

Its product portfolio includes the equipment needed to connect:

• renewable-energy parks;
• thermal generation;
• data centres;
• industrial plants;
• new transmission corridors;
• large interstate networks.

That concentration is powerful during grid scarcity

India is simultaneously adding:

• solar;
• wind;
• storage;
• data centres;
• industrial load;
• urban electricity demand.

Generation alone is not enough.

Electricity has to be transmitted, transformed, switched, protected and controlled.

Transformers are among the biggest bottlenecks

Large transformers require specialized manufacturing infrastructure and long qualification cycles.

GE Vernova T&D's Vadodara manufacturing base supplies high-voltage products including 765 kV transformers and shunt reactors.

A major POWERGRID programme involves more than 70 extra-high-voltage transformer and reactor units for renewable transmission corridors.

GE is deliberately expanding ahead of the next backlog cycle

The company announced approximately ₹806 crore of additional investment across:

• transformers and reactors at Vadodara;
• AIS and GIS capacity;
• air-core reactors;
• bushings;
• Hosur and Padappai facilities.

This was in addition to an earlier approximately ₹140 crore expansion programme.

A further May 2026 investment created new product capacity

GE Vernova T&D approved approximately ₹5.5 crore for a new Vallam, Tamil Nadu facility covering:

• disconnectors;
• drives for 362 kV dead-tank circuit breakers.

First production was targeted for around December 2026.

GE's capex strategy is broadening the domestic product stack

The company is not investing in one transformer line alone.

It is increasing capacity across several pieces of the transmission system.

This can improve:

• localization;
• delivery times;
• export capability;
• customer wallet share;
• factory utilization.

Siemens Energy is making an even larger transformer commitment

The company has an ongoing expansion programme of roughly ₹740 crore covering transformer and switchgear capacity.

It has also announced approximately ₹2,060 crore of additional investment for around 30,000 MVA of greenfield large-transformer capacity.

The new capacity is expected to arrive progressively around FY30–FY32.

The timing difference matters

GE's major current expansion is nearer term.

Siemens Energy's new greenfield transformer capacity has a much longer commissioning horizon.

If transformer scarcity remains acute through FY27–FY29, near-term capacity can carry disproportionate value.

Siemens Energy has a profitable second engine: Power Generation

April–June segment revenue was approximately:

• Power Transmission: ₹1,386 crore;
• Power Generation: ₹1,099 crore.

That means roughly 44% of quarterly revenue came from generation.

This diversification changes the risk profile

Siemens Energy is exposed not only to grids but also:

• steam turbines;
• gas turbines;
• industrial turbines;
• generators;
• waste-heat-recovery systems;
• service;
• modernization.

GE Vernova T&D's listed company is considerably more concentrated.

Concentration increases both upside and downside

If India's transmission capex remains exceptionally strong, GE benefits more directly.

If TBCB ordering slows for several quarters, there are fewer unrelated earnings streams to absorb the impact.

Q1 order intake already shows this volatility

This was far below quarterly revenue of ₹1,836 crore.

As a result, backlog fell approximately 2.5% sequentially from the record March level.

This does not yet indicate weak demand

Management attributed the Q1 booking slowdown primarily to weaker TBCB realization in the preceding January–March market pipeline.

Management also indicated that the June–July pipeline had improved.

The distinction matters.

A delayed order award is not the same as a cancelled transmission programme.

GE's backlog still exceeds ₹20,900 crore

That compares with FY26 annual revenue of approximately ₹6,206 crore.

The backlog therefore remains more than three times the latest annual revenue.

This gives meaningful multi-year visibility despite the soft Q1 intake.

The backlog customer mix is unusually strong

Approximately:

• 77% came from private customers;
• 21% from central utilities and PSUs;
• 2% from state utilities.

This matters because collection and project-execution risk can differ materially by customer category.

GE's Q1 orders were also geographically diversified

Approximately 54% of Q1 order intake was export-related.

Wins included:

• CTs and CVTs for North America;
• 400 kV GIS for Spain;
• GIS for Morocco;
• a 245 kV transformer for a semiconductor customer;
• grid-automation packages;
• AIS/GIS export equipment.

Exports give Indian factories access to global scarcity

Transformer and switchgear shortages are not confined to India.

North American and European grid investment can keep Indian factories busy even when domestic tender timing moves quarter to quarter.

But export mix can also move margins sharply

GE management noted that Q1 gross margin fell partly because export revenue contribution was lower than in especially profitable earlier periods.

Q1 gross margin was approximately 41.3% versus 48.4% a year earlier.

EBITDA margin nevertheless remained above 25%

That is down from 29.1% in Q1 FY26.

But it remains an exceptional margin for heavy transmission equipment.

Why did EBITDA margin hold up better than gross margin?

Revenue scale creates operating leverage across:

• employee cost;
• engineering;
• fixed factory overhead;
• administration.

Higher execution can therefore absorb operating expenses even when product gross margin moderates.

Siemens Energy currently generates a 21.9% operating margin

Its profit from operations was approximately ₹545 crore.

The disclosed margin improved 430 basis points year on year.

Management cited:

• operating leverage;
• higher exports;
• disciplined order execution.

The margin definitions are different

EBITDA excludes depreciation.

Profit from operations can include depreciation effects.

It would therefore be incorrect to call the 320-basis-point gap a perfectly apples-to-apples EBITDA advantage.

PAT margin provides another useful lens

A simple Bull Run calculation gives:

• GE Vernova T&D PAT margin: approximately 19.8%;
• Siemens Energy India PAT margin: approximately 17.7%.

GE therefore also converts a higher percentage of revenue into net profit.

Siemens Energy wins absolute earnings because it is larger

GE PAT:

₹363 crore.

Siemens Energy PAT:

₹441 crore.

Siemens Energy therefore produces approximately ₹78 crore more quarterly PAT.

The order books are surprisingly close

Backlog relative to revenue favours GE

Using one quarter's current revenue:

• GE backlog / Q1 revenue: approximately 11.4x;
• Siemens Energy backlog / Q3 revenue: approximately 7.8x.

This is not an execution-duration forecast.

It simply demonstrates that GE carries more contracted work relative to its current size.

Siemens Energy backlog is still extremely strong

Its backlog increased approximately 16.4% year on year.

At ₹19,331 crore, the business has substantial visibility across transmission and generation.

GE's FY26 profitability provides a useful benchmark

For FY26, GE Vernova T&D reported approximately:

• ₹6,206 crore revenue;
• ₹1,684 crore EBITDA;
• 27.1% EBITDA margin;
• ₹1,230 crore PAT.

Q1 FY27 margin is therefore lower than FY26, but the company remains firmly inside a very high profitability regime.

The Bull Run return ratios are extraordinary for GE

GE's 70%-plus ROCE deserves attention

It reflects a combination of:

• high margins;
• asset utilization;
• customer advances and working-capital economics;
• low debt;
• rapid revenue growth.

Few large Indian industrial companies currently produce this level of standardized return on capital.

Siemens Energy's 9.9% standardized ROCE needs context

Its historical balance-sheet and earnings series is therefore much shorter and structurally affected by the demerger.

The current 21.9% operating margin suggests the underlying business is currently far more profitable than the simple 9.9% standardized ROCE number alone might imply.

More post-demerger history is needed

As additional quarters and annual results enter the database, Siemens Energy's:

• ROCE;
• ROE;
• free cash flow;
• cash conversion;

will become easier to compare with long-listed companies.

The market capitalisations are almost identical

Only about ₹4,300 crore separates their market values

That is less than a 4% difference.

The stock market is therefore assigning almost the same enterprise-scale value to two businesses with quite different earnings structures.

GE is more expensive on both P/E and book value

GE trades around:

• 92.1x trailing earnings;
• 44.7x book value.

Siemens Energy trades around:

• 83.7x trailing earnings;
• 25.9x book value.

GE's premium is supported by extraordinary current returns

A 44x price-to-book ratio would normally look extreme.

But a 55%-plus ROE means each rupee of reported book equity currently generates unusually high earnings.

This is exactly why P/B should never be interpreted without ROE.

The risk is return normalization

If GE's ROCE eventually falls from 70% toward ordinary industrial levels while the stock remains at a huge book multiple, valuation compression can be severe.

The current price therefore assumes:

• high margins;
• strong grid demand;
• good working-capital economics;
• continued factory utilization.

Siemens Energy has a different valuation case

Its P/E is lower.

Its current quarterly absolute PAT is higher.

Its business is diversified into Power Generation.

But the standardized return history is less established.

Which has the larger backlog?

GE Vernova T&D, narrowly.

Approximately ₹20,930 crore versus Siemens Energy India at ₹19,331 crore.

Which is growing faster?

Essentially a tie.

GE grew revenue approximately 38.0% and Siemens Energy approximately 39.3%.

Which has the higher disclosed operating margin?

GE Vernova T&D.

25.1% EBITDA margin versus Siemens Energy's 21.9% profit-from-operations margin.

The definitions differ.

Which generates more PAT?

Siemens Energy India.

₹441 crore versus GE Vernova T&D at approximately ₹363 crore.

Which is the purer grid-equipment company?

GE Vernova T&D.

Its listed business is concentrated on transmission, distribution and grid technologies.

Which is more diversified?

Siemens Energy India.

It owns both Power Transmission and Power Generation businesses.

Which has the stronger standardized ROCE?

GE Vernova T&D by a very wide margin.

Approximately 70.5% versus 9.9%, while noting Siemens Energy's short post-demerger listed history.

Which stock is cheaper?

Siemens Energy India on current P/E and price-to-book.

It trades around 83.7x P/E versus GE at 92.1x.

GE earns much higher current standardized returns.

Which is better: GE Vernova T&D or Siemens Energy India?

GE Vernova T&D currently has the stronger pure grid-equipment and capital-efficiency profile. It produces a 25% EBITDA margin, 70%-plus standardized ROCE, strong cash conversion and a slightly larger backlog despite being smaller by quarterly revenue.

Siemens Energy India currently has the stronger diversified earnings profile. It generates more revenue, more PAT, maintains a 21.9% operating margin, owns a profitable Power Generation business and trades at a moderately lower P/E.

The valuation gap is surprisingly small because the market capitalisations are almost identical.

At September 2026 valuations, GE is the stronger high-return pure transmission franchise, while Siemens Energy offers the more balanced earnings-and-valuation setup. GE needs extraordinary returns to remain extraordinary; Siemens Energy needs its post-demerger return ratios to catch up with the strength already visible in its quarterly income statement.

Frequently asked questions