UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

SCHEDULE 14A INFORMATION

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934

(Amendment No.     )

Filed by the Registrant  ¨                              Filed by a Partyparty other than the Registrant  ¨

Check the appropriate box:

IDEX Corporation

(Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)

(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if Other Than The Registrant)

IDEX CORPORATION

1925 West Field Court, Suite 200

Lake Forest, IL 60045

March 7, 20125, 2014

Dear Stockholder:

You are cordially invited to attend the Annual Meeting of Stockholders of IDEX Corporation (the Company) which will be held on Tuesday, April 10, 2012,8, 2014, at 9:00 a.m. Central Time, at the Lake Forest Graduate School of Business, 1905 West Field Court, Lake Forest,The Westin Chicago North Shore, 601 North Milwaukee Avenue, Wheeling, Illinois 60045.60090.

Details of the business to be conducted at the Annual Meeting are given in the attached Notice of Annual Meeting and Proxy Statement. Included with the Proxy Statement is a copy of the Company’s 20112013 Annual Report. We encourage you to read the Annual Report. It includes information on the Company’s operations, markets, products and services, as well as the Company’s audited financial statements.

Whether or not you attend the Annual Meeting, it is important that your shares be represented and voted. Therefore, we urge you to sign, date, and promptly return the accompanying proxy card in the enclosed envelope. Alternatively, you can vote over the telephone or the Internet as described on the proxy card. If you decide to attend the Annual Meeting, you will be able to vote in person, even if you have previously submitted your proxy card, or voted by telephone or over the Internet.

On behalf of the Board of Directors, I would like to express our appreciation for your continued interest in the affairs of the Company. We look forward to seeing you at the Annual Meeting.

Sincerely,

ANDREW K. SILVERNAIL

Chairman of the Board, President and

Chief Executive Officer

IDEX CORPORATION

NOTICE OF ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

APRIL 10, 20128, 2014

To the Stockholders:

The Annual Meeting of Stockholders of IDEX Corporation (the “Company”)Company) will be held on Tuesday, April 10, 2012,8, 2014, at 9:00 a.m. Central Time, at the Lake Forest Graduate School of Business, 1905 West Field Court, Lake Forest,The Westin Chicago North Shore, 601 North Milwaukee Avenue, Wheeling, Illinois 60045,60090, for the following purposes:

The Board of Directors fixed the close of business on February 17, 2012,14, 2014, as the record date for the determination of stockholders entitled to notice of, and to vote at, the Annual Meeting.

You may obtain directions to the location of the Annual Meeting by visiting our website at www.idexcorp.com.

By Order of the Board of Directors

FRANK J. NOTARO

Vice President -— General Counsel

and Secretary

March 7, 20125, 2014

Lake Forest, Illinois

IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING THE AVAILABILITY OF PROXY MATERIALS FOR THE

ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS TO BE HELD ON APRIL 10, 20128, 2014

The Proxy Statement and 20112013 Annual Report of IDEX Corporation are available at:

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=83305&p=irol-reportsAnnual

PROXY STATEMENT

IDEX Corporation (the Company or IDEX) has prepared this Proxy Statement in connection with the solicitation by the Company’s Board of Directors of proxies for the Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held on Tuesday, April 10, 2012,8, 2014, at 9:00 a.m. Central Time, at the Lake Forest Graduate School of Business, 1905 West Field Court, Lake Forest,The Westin Chicago North Shore, 601 North Milwaukee Avenue, Wheeling, Illinois 60045.60090. The Company commenced distribution of this Proxy Statement and the accompanying materials on March 7, 2012.5, 2014.

The Company will bear the costs of preparing and mailing this Proxy Statement and other costs of the proxy solicitation made by the Company’s Board of Directors. Certain of the Company’s officers and employees may solicit the submission of proxies authorizing the voting of shares in accordance with the Board of Directors’ recommendations, but no additional remuneration will be paid by the Company for the solicitation of those proxies. These solicitations may be made by personal interview, telephone, email or facsimile transmission. The Company has made arrangements with brokerage firms and other record holders of the Company’sits Common Stock for the forwarding of proxy solicitation materials to the beneficial owners of that stock. The Company will reimburse those brokerage firms and others for their reasonable out-of-pocket expenses in connection with this work. In addition, the Company has engaged Morrow & Co., LLC, 470 West Ave., Stamford, Connecticut to assist in proxy solicitation and collection at a cost of $6,000, plus out-of-pocket expenses.

1

VOTING AT THE MEETING

The record of stockholders entitled to notice of, and to vote at, the Annual Meeting was taken as of the close of business on February 17, 2012,14, 2014, and each stockholder will be entitled to vote at the meeting any shares of the Company’s Common Stock held of record on that date. 83,804,60680,851,529 shares of the Company’s Common Stock were outstanding at the close of business on February 17, 2012.14, 2014. Each share entitles its holder of record to one vote on each matter upon which votes are taken at the Annual Meeting. No other securities are entitled to be voted at the Annual Meeting.

A quorum of stockholders is necessary to take action at the Annual Meeting. A majority of outstanding shares of the Company’s Common Stock present in person or represented by proxy will constitute a quorum. The Company will appoint election inspectors for the meeting to determine whether or not a quorum is present, and to tabulate votes cast by proxy or in person at the Annual Meeting.person. Under certain circumstances, a broker or other nominee may have discretionary authority to vote certain shares of Common Stock if instructions have not been received from the beneficial owner or other person entitled to vote. The election inspectors will treat directions to withhold authority, abstentions and broker non-votes (which occur when a broker or other nominee holding shares for a beneficial owner does not vote on a particular proposal because such broker or other nominee does not have discretionary voting power with respect to that item and has not received instructions from the beneficial owner) as present and entitled to vote for purposes of determining the presence of a quorum for the transaction of business at the Annual Meeting. The following sets forth the voting procedures for each proposal at the Annual Meeting:

Proposal 1 — Election of Directors. Directors are elected by a plurality of the votes cast at the Annual Meeting. DirectionsMeeting; provided however, that the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines provide for a “plurality plus” standard with respect to the election of directors, under which any nominee who receives a greater number of withhold authority, abstentionsvotes than affirmative votes in an uncontested election is required to submit an offer of resignation for consideration by the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee of the Board of Directors, as more fully described under Proposal 1 — Election of Directors. Abstentions and broker non-votes will have no effect on the election of directors.

Proposal 2 — Advisory Vote on Executive Compensation. Approval of the compensation of the Company’s named executive officers will require the affirmative vote of a majority of shares present in person or represented by proxy and entitled to vote on the matter. Abstentions will have the effect of a vote against approval and broker non-votes will have no effect on the vote.

Proposal 3 — Ratification of Auditors. Approval of ratification of the auditors will require the affirmative vote of a majority of shares present in person or represented by proxy and entitled to vote on the matter. Abstentions will have the effect of a vote against approval and broker non-votes will have no effect on the vote.

The Company requests that you mark the accompanying proxy card to indicate your votes, sign and date it, and return it to the Company in the enclosed envelope, or vote by telephone or over the Internet as described on the proxy card. If you vote by telephone or over the Internet, you should not mail your proxy card. If your completed proxy card or telephone or Internet voting instructions are received prior to the meeting, your shares will be voted in accordance with your voting instructions. If you sign and return your proxy card but do not give voting instructions, your shares will be voted FOR the election of the Company’s nominees as directors, FOR approval of the compensation of the Company’s named executive officers, FOR approval of the ratification of the appointment of Deloitte & Touche LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for 2012,2014, and in the discretion of the proxy holders as to any other business which may properly come before the meeting. Any proxy solicited hereby may be revoked by the person or persons giving it at any time before it has been exercised at the Annual Meeting by giving notice of revocation to the Company in writing prior to the meeting. If you decide to attend the Annual Meeting, you will be able to vote in person, even if you have previously submitted your proxy card, or voted by telephone or over the Internet. The Company requests that all such written notices of revocation to the Company be addressed to Frank J. Notaro, Vice President - General Counsel and Secretary, IDEX Corporation, 1925 West Field Court, Suite 200, Lake Forest, IL 60045.

2

PROPOSAL 1 — ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

The Company’s Restated Certificate of Incorporation, as amended, provides for a three-class Board, with one class being elected each year for a term of three years. The Board of Directors currently consists of nine members, three of whom are Class III directors whose terms will expire at this year’s Annual Meeting, three of whom are Class II directors whose terms will expire at the Annual Meeting to be held in 2015, and three of whom are Class III directors whose terms will expire at the Annual Meeting to be held in 2013, and three of whom are Class I directors whose terms will expire at the Annual Meeting to be held in 2014. Mr. Hermance who is currently serving as a Class II director will not stand for election this year. As a result, the Board of Directors will be reduced to eight members at this year’s Annual Meeting.2016.

The Company’s Board of Directors has nominated twothree individuals for election as Class III directors to serve for a three-year term expiring at the Annual Meeting to be held in 2015,2017, or upon the election and qualification of their successors. The nominees of the Board of Directors are William M. CookBradley J. Bell, Gregory F. Milzcik and Michael T. Tokarz. Messrs. Cook and Tokarz areAndrew K. Silvernail, each of whom is currently serving as directorsa director of the Company. The nominees and the directors serving in Class IIIII and Class IIII whose terms expire in future years and who will serve or continue to serve after the Annual Meeting are listed below with brief statements setting forth their present principal occupations and other information, including any directorships in other public companies, and their particular experiences, qualifications, attributes and skills that lead to the conclusion they should serve as a director.

If for any reason any of the nominees for a Class II directorship are unavailable to serve, proxies solicited hereby may be voted for a substitute. The Board, however, expects the nominees to be available.

Under the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines, any director nominee who receives a greater number of withhold votes than affirmative votes in an uncontested election is required to submit an offer of resignation for consideration by the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee of the Board of Directors within 90 days from the date of election. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee must then consider all of the relevant facts and circumstances and recommend to the Board of Directors the action to be taken with respect to the offer of resignation.

3

The Company’s Board of Directors Recommends a Vote FOR

the Nominees in Class III Identified Below.

Nominees for Election

Class II:I: Nominees for Three-Year Term

Mr. Cook has been Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of Donaldson Company, Incorporated since prior to 2007. Mr. Cook is a director of Donaldson Company, Incorporated and Valspar Corporation.

Mr. Cook’s strong business and organizational leadership skills and his relevant experience in technological industries led to the conclusion that he should serve on IDEX’s Board of Directors. Mr. Cook is a 31-year veteran of Donaldson, a technology-driven global company that manufactures filtration systems designed to remove contaminants from air and liquids. Throughout his career at Donaldson, Mr. Cook has served in several senior executive positions, and was elected as a director in 2004. Mr. Cook received a bachelor of science degree in business administration and a master of business administration degree from Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.

Mr. Cook is the Chairman of the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors.

Mr. Tokarz has been a member of The Tokarz Group L.L.C. since prior to 2007. Mr. Tokarz is a director of CNO Financial Group, MVC Capital, Inc., Walter Investment Management Corp., Walter Energy, Inc., and Mueller Water Products, Inc.

Mr. Tokarz’s knowledge and experience in banking and finance, his entrepreneurial and business leadership skills, his extensive board experience, his corporate governance training and his prominent position in the business community led to the conclusion that he should serve on IDEX’s Board of Directors. Mr. Tokarz is a senior investment professional with over 30 years of lending and investment experience. He has extensive experience in leveraged buyouts, financings, restructurings and dispositions. He is currently the Chairman of The Tokarz Group L.L.C., a private, New York-based merchant bank founded by Mr. Tokarz in 2002, and Chairman and Portfolio Manager of MVC Capital, Inc., a registered investment company advised by The Tokarz Group. Mr. Tokarz has served on the boards of publicly traded companies for over 20 years. Through his executive experience and board memberships, Mr. Tokarz has acquired substantial experience in corporate governance. Mr. Tokarz chairs the board of directors of the Illinois Emerging Technologies Fund and is a member of the Illinois VENTURES board of managers. Mr. Tokarz received a bachelor of arts degree in economics, with high distinction, and a master of business administration degree from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Mr. Tokarz is a certified public accountant.

Mr. Tokarz is Chairman of the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors and a member of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee of the Board of Directors. Mr. Tokarz was appointed Lead Director of the Board of Directors effective January 1, 2012.

4

Other Incumbent Directors

Class III: Three-Year Term Expires in 2013

Ms. Chandy has been Managing Director, Vice President of Dow Plastics Additives, a unit of The Dow Chemical Company, since 2011. From 2010 to 2011, Ms. Chandy served as Chief Marketing Officer of The Dow Chemical Company. Ms. Chandy served as Chief Marketing Officer for Rohm and Hass Company from 2007 to 2009.

Ms. Chandy’s marketing skills, her executive management experience, her relevant experience in life science and technological industries and her extensive engineering and management education led to the conclusion that she should serve on IDEX’s Board of Directors. Ms. Chandy has been working for scientific and engineering organizations since 1992, including Thermo Fisher Scientific, Boston Scientific Corporation, Millipore Corporation and Rohm and Haas Company. Throughout her career, Ms. Chandy has held general management and marketing leadership roles. Ms. Chandy received a bachelor of science degree in material science and engineering from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), a master of science degree in materials science and engineering from Northwestern University, and a master of business administration degree from Sloan School of Management at MIT.

Ms. Chandy is a member of the Audit Committee and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee of the Board of Directors.

Mr. Mrozek served as Vice Chairman and Chief Financial Officer of The ServiceMaster Company from November 2006 to his retirement in March 2008. Mr. Mrozek is a director of G&K Services, Inc.

Mr. Mrozek’s strategic and operating leadership skills, his extensive experience and expertise in the business services industry and his financial reporting expertise led to the conclusion that he should serve on IDEX’s Board of Directors. Through over 20 years of executive experience in various senior positions in general management, operations and finance at ServiceMaster, a residential and commercial service company, Mr. Mrozek developed extensive knowledge of the business services industry and gained valuable financial expertise and experience in mergers and acquisitions. Prior to joining ServiceMaster in 1987, Mr. Mrozek spent 12 years in public accounting with Arthur Andersen & Co. Mr. Mrozek has also acquired substantial experience in corporate governance as a director on the boards of several public and private companies. Mr. Mrozek received a bachelor of science degree in accountancy with honors from the University of Illinois and is a certified public accountant. Mr. Mrozek also serves on the boards of various not-for-profit organizations and charitable causes.

Mr. Mrozek is a member of the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors.

Mr. Satterthwaite has been President of Cummins Power Generation, a unit of Cummins, Inc., since June 2008. From prior to 2007 to 2008, Mr. Satterthwaite held the position of Vice President, Generator Set Business at Cummins Power Generation.

Mr. Satterthwaite’s business leadership and sales skills, international experience and extensive experience in industrial manufacturing led to the conclusion that he should serve on IDEX’s Board of Directors. Since joining Cummins Inc. in 1988, Mr. Satterthwaite has held various positions at Cummins Power Generation and other divisions of Cummins Inc., including 14 years in managerial and

5

sales positions in the United Kingdom and Singapore. Prior to joining Cummins Inc., Mr. Satterthwaite spent four years at Schlumberger Limited, an oilfield services provider, as a General Field Engineer. Mr. Satterthwaite received a bachelor of science degree in civil engineering from Cornell University and a masters in business administration degree from Stanford University.

Mr. Satterthwaite is a member of the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors.

Class I: Three-Year Term Expires in 2014

Mr. Bell served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Nalco Company from prior to 20072008 until his retirement in 2010. Mr. Bell is a director of Compass Minerals International, Inc. and Hennessy Capital Acquisition Corp.

Mr. Bell’s business leadership skills, his knowledge of technology and manufacturing industries, his financial reporting expertise and his corporate governance and executive compensation experience led to the conclusion that he should serve on IDEX’sthe Board of Directors. For over seven years, Mr. Bell served as executive vice president and chief financial officer of Nalco Company.Nalco. In addition, Mr. Bell has over 30 years combined experience as an executive in the technology and manufacturing industries, including positions at Rohm and Haas Company, Whirlpool Corporation and Bundy Corporation. Through his experience, Mr. Bell has developed valuable financial expertise and experience in mergers and acquisitions, private equity and capital markets transactions. Mr. Bell has a long career in corporate finance, including more than 12 years of experience as chief financial officer of a publicly traded company, during which he obtained significant financial management and reporting expertise. He has held directorships at publicly traded companies for over 20 years, including positions as chairs ofduring which he chaired governance, audit and compensation committees. Through his executive experience and board memberships, Mr. Bell has acquired substantial training and experience in corporate governance and executive compensation. Mr. Bell received a bachelor of science degree in finance with high honors from the University of Illinois and a master of business administration degree with distinction from Harvard University.

Mr. Bell is the Chairman of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and a member of the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors.

Mr. Silvernail was appointed Chairman of the Board by the Board of Directors effective January 1, 2012. Mr. Silvernail has been President and Chief Executive Officer and a director of the Company since August 10, 2011. Prior to his appointment as President and Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Silvernail served since January 2011 as Vice President Group Executive of Health & Science Technologies, Global Dispensing and Fire & Safety/Diversified Products. From February 2010 to December 2010, Mr. Silvernail was IDEX’s Vice President Group Executive of Health & Sciences Technologies and Global Dispensing. Mr. Silvernail joined IDEX in January 2009 as Vice President Group Executive of Health & Science Technologies. Prior to joining IDEX, Mr. Silvernail served as Group President at Rexnord Industries, Inc. from April 2007 to August 2008, and Division President at Rexnord from April 2005 to April 2007.

Mr. Silvernail’s relevant experience with engineering and technology industries in general, together with his extensive management experience led to the conclusion that he should serve on IDEX’s Board of Directors. Mr. Silvernail received his bachelor of science degree from Dartmouth College and his masters of business administration degree from Harvard University.

6

Mr. Milzcik has beenserved as President and Chief Executive Officer of Barnes Group Inc. sincefrom prior to 2007.2008 until his retirement in 2013. Mr. Milzcik is a director of Barnes GroupKulicke & Soffa Industries Inc.

Mr. Milzcik’s business leadership skills, his relevant experience in industrial manufacturing, his corporate governance and executive compensation training and his extensive technical and management education led to the conclusion that he should serve on IDEX’sthe Board of Directors. Through his executive experience at Barnes Group, Inc., Mr. Milzcik obtained a unique understanding of the industrial manufacturing business environment and gained exposure to and familiarity with IDEX’s customer base. In addition, Mr. Milzcik gained experience with international commerce, government contracting, complex project management, intellectual property management and industry cyclicality, which enrich his perspective as a director of the Company. Mr. Milzcik has acquired substantial training in corporate governance and executive compensation through his executive experience, board memberships and attendance at the Harvard Directors College, Stanford Directors College and ODX/Columbia Director Education Program, and has been named a Board Leadership Fellow by the National Association of Corporate Directors. Mr. Milzcik received a bachelor of science degree in applied science and technology from Thomas Edison State College, a master’s degree in management and administration from Cambridge College, a certificate of graduate studies in administration and management from Harvard University and a doctorate from Case Western Reserve University, with

4

research focusing on management systems in cyclical markets. Mr. Milzcik is a Certified Manufacturing Engineer through the Society of Manufacturing Engineers, and has aan FAA Airframe and Power Plant License.

Mr. Milzcik is a member of the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors. Effective April 8, 2014, Mr. Milzcik will become a member of the Audit Committee, and will cease to be a member of the Compensation Committee, of the Board of Directors.

Mr. Silvernail was appointed Chairman of the Board effective January 1, 2012. Mr. Silvernail has served as President and Chief Executive Officer and a director of the Company since August 10, 2011. Prior to his appointment as President and Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Silvernail served since January 2011 as Vice President Group Executive of the Company’s Health & Science Technologies, Global Dispensing and Fire & Safety/Diversified Products business segments. From February 2010 to December 2010, Mr. Silvernail was Vice President Group Executive of the Company’s Health & Sciences Technologies and Global Dispensing business segments. Mr. Silvernail joined IDEX in January 2009 as Vice President Group Executive of Health & Science Technologies. Mr. Silvernail is a director of Stryker Corporation.

Mr. Silvernail’s relevant experience with engineering and technology industries in general, together with his extensive management experience led to the conclusion that he should serve on the Board of Directors. Mr. Silvernail received his bachelor of science degree in government from Dartmouth College and his masters of business administration degree from Harvard University.

Other Incumbent Directors

Class II: Three-Year Term Expires in 2015

Mr. Cook has served as Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of Donaldson Company, Inc. since prior to 2008. Mr. Cook is a director of Donaldson Company and Valspar Corporation.

Mr. Cook’s strong business and organizational leadership skills and his relevant experience in technological industries led to the conclusion that he should serve on the Board of Directors. Mr. Cook is a 33-year veteran of Donaldson Company, a technology-driven global company that manufactures filtration systems designed to remove contaminants from air and liquids. Throughout his career at Donaldson Company, Mr. Cook has served in several senior executive positions, and was elected as a director in 2004. Mr. Cook received a bachelor of science degree in business administration and a master of business administration degree from Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.

Mr. Cook is a member of the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors.

Mr. Tokarz has been a member of The Tokarz Group L.L.C. since prior to 2008. Mr. Tokarz is a director of CNO Financial Group, MVC Capital, Inc., Walter Investment Management Corp., Walter Energy, Inc., and Mueller Water Products, Inc.

Mr. Tokarz’s knowledge and experience in banking and finance, his entrepreneurial and business leadership skills, his extensive board experience, his corporate governance training and his prominent position in the business community led to the conclusion that he should serve on the Board of Directors. Mr. Tokarz is a senior investment professional with over 30 years of lending and investment

5

experience. He has extensive experience in leveraged buyouts, financings, restructurings and dispositions. He is currently the Chairman of The Tokarz Group L.L.C., a private, New York-based merchant bank founded by Mr. Tokarz in 2002, and Chairman and Portfolio Manager of MVC Capital, Inc., a registered investment company advised by The Tokarz Group. Mr. Tokarz has served on the boards of publicly traded companies for over 20 years. Through his executive experience and board memberships, Mr. Tokarz has acquired substantial experience in corporate governance. Mr. Tokarz chairs the board of directors of the Illinois Emerging Technologies Fund and is a member of the Illinois VENTURES board of managers. Mr. Tokarz received a bachelor of arts degree in economics, with high distinction, and a master of business administration degree from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Mr. Tokarz is a certified public accountant.

Mr. Tokarz is Lead Director of the Board of Directors, Chairman of the Compensation Committee and a member of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee of the Board of Directors.

Ms. Warner has been Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Sapphire Energy, Inc. since 2012. From 2009 to 2011, Ms. Warner was Chairman and President of Sapphire Energy. From prior to 2008, Ms. Warner was Group Vice President, Global Refining, BP plc.

Ms. Warner’s operating leadership skills, international experience and extensive experience in the energy, refining and transportation industries led to the conclusion that she should serve on the Board of Directors. During her 25 years at BP and Amoco, Inc., Ms. Warner gained significant knowledge of the global energy industry and served in numerous leadership roles, including overseeing BP’s Global Refining business and its Health Safety Security Environment, with a consistent record of success in coordinating the operations of thousands of employees across BP’s global facilities. In her current role as Chief Executive Officer of Sapphire Energy, an alternative energy venture, Ms. Warner has overseen the raising of substantial investment capital and the successful completion of a new demonstration facility for the company. Ms. Warner received a bachelor of engineering degree in chemical engineering from Vanderbilt University and a masters of business administration degree from Illinois Institute of Technology.

Ms. Warner is a member of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee of the Board of Directors. Effective April 8, 2014, Ms. Warner will become a member of the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors.

Class III: Three-Year Term Expires in 2016

Mr. Mrozek served as Vice Chairman and Chief Financial Officer of The ServiceMaster Company from prior to 2008 until his retirement in March 2008. Mr. Mrozek is a director of G&K Services, Inc.

Mr. Mrozek’s strategic and operating leadership skills, his extensive experience and expertise in the business services industry and his financial reporting expertise led to the conclusion that he should serve on the Board of Directors. Through over 20 years of executive experience in various senior positions in general management, operations and finance at ServiceMaster, a residential and commercial service company, Mr. Mrozek developed extensive knowledge of the business services industry and gained valuable financial expertise and experience in mergers and acquisitions. Prior to joining ServiceMaster in 1987, Mr. Mrozek spent 12 years in public accounting with Arthur Andersen & Co. Mr. Mrozek has also acquired substantial experience in corporate governance as a director on the boards of several public and private companies. Mr. Mrozek received a bachelor of science degree in accountancy with honors from the University of Illinois and is a certified public accountant.

Mr. Mrozek is Chairman of the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors.

6

Mr. Parry has served as Vice Chairman of Illinois Tool Works Inc. (ITW) since 2010. From prior to 2008 until 2010, Mr. Parry was Executive Vice President of ITW with responsibility for the Polymers and Fluids Group.

Mr. Parry’s strategic and operating leadership skills and global commercial perspective gained from over 30 years of international business leadership experience, his significant acquisition experience and his extensive expertise in the industrial products manufacturing industry led to the conclusion that he should serve on the Board of Directors. During 18 years of executive and management experience in various senior management positions at ITW, a multinational manufacturer of a diversified range of industrial products and equipment, Mr. Parry has successfully grown the operations and profitability of multiple business units and helped ITW complete numerous acquisitions. Prior to joining ITW in 1994, Mr. Parry spent 17 years in various executive and management positions at Imperial Chemical Industries, which at the time was one of the largest chemical producers in the world. Mr. Parry received a bachelor of science degree in chemistry, a master of science degree in chemistry and a Ph.D. in polymer chemistry from Victoria University of Manchester, Manchester, England.

Mr. Parry is a member of the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors.

Mr. Satterthwaite has served as President of Cummins Power Generation, a unit of Cummins, Inc., since June 2008. From prior to 2008, Mr. Satterthwaite was Vice President, Generator Set Business at Cummins Power Generation.

Mr. Satterthwaite’s business leadership and sales skills, international experience and extensive experience in industrial manufacturing led to the conclusion that he should serve on the Board of Directors. Since joining Cummins in 1988, Mr. Satterthwaite has held various positions at Cummins Power Generation and other divisions of Cummins, including 14 years in managerial and sales positions in the United Kingdom and Singapore. Prior to joining Cummins, Mr. Satterthwaite spent four years at Schlumberger Limited, an oilfield services provider, as a General Field Engineer. Mr. Satterthwaite received a bachelor of science degree in civil engineering from Cornell University and a masters in business administration degree from Stanford University.

Mr. Satterthwaite is a member of the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors. Effective April 8, 2014, Mr. Satterthwaite will become a member of the Compensation Committee, and will cease to be a member of the Audit Committee, of the Board of Directors.

7

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Information Regarding the Board of Directors and Committees

The Board of Directors has the ultimate authority for the management of the Company’s business. In February 2012,November 2013, the Board affirmedamended the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines to add the plurality plus voting standard described in Proposal 1 and otherwise affirmed the Guidelines which, along with the charters of the Board committees, the Company’s Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, and the Standards for Director Independence, provide the framework for the governance of the Company. The Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines address matters such as composition, election of directors, size and retirement age offor the Board, Board membership criteria, the role and responsibilities of the Board, director compensation, share ownership guidelines, and the frequency of Board meetings (including meetings to be held without the presence of management). The Company’s Code of Business Conduct and Ethics sets forth the guiding principles of business ethics and certain legal requirements applicable to all of the Company’s employees and directors. Copies of the current Corporate Governance Guidelines, the charters of the Board committees, the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, and the Standards for Director Independence are available under the Investor Relations links on the Company’s website at www.idexcorp.com.

The Board selects the Company’s executive officers, delegates responsibilities for the conduct of the Company’s operations to those officers, and monitors their performance. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Board of Directors oversees an annual assessment of enterprise risk exposure, and the management of such risk, conducted by the Company’s executives. When assessing enterprise risk, the Board focuses on the achievement of organizational objectives, including strategic objectives, to improve long-term performance and enhance stockholder value. Direct oversight allows the Board to assess management’s inclination for risk, to determine what constitutes an appropriate level of risk for the Company and to discuss with management the means by which to control risk. In addition, while the Board of Directors has the ultimate oversight responsibility for the risk management process, the Audit Committee focuses on financial risk management and exposure.exposure, and legal compliance. The Audit Committee receives an annual risk assessment report from the Company’s internal auditors and reviews and discusses the Company’s financial risk exposures and the steps management has taken to monitor, control and report those exposures.

The Company’s By-laws permit the Board to select its Chairman in the manner it determines to be most appropriate for the Company.appropriate. The Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that, if the Chairman of the Board is not the Chief Executive Officer, and is an independent director, there shall be no Lead Director. If the Chairman of the Board is the Chief Executive Officer or is not an independent director, the independent directors shall elect an independent Lead Director. In connection with Mr. Silvernail’s appointment as Chairman, effective January 1, 2012, the Board appointed Michael T. Tokarz as Lead Director. The responsibilities of the Lead Director include:

The independent non-management directors of the Board meet separately as a group at every regularly scheduled Board meeting. The Chairman (if independent) or Lead Director (if the Chairman is not independent) generally presides at these non-management executive sessions. During 2011,2013, the Board held sevensix meetings.

The Board believes that its current leadership structure provides independent board leadership and engagement while deriving the benefit of having the CEO also serve as Chairman of the Board.

8

Our The Chief Executive Officer, as the individual with primary responsibility for managing the Company’s

8

day-to-day operations, is best positioned to chair regular Board meetings and to oversee discussion on business and strategic issues. Coupled with the existence of a Lead Director and regular executive sessions of the non-management directors, this structure provides independent oversight, including risk oversight, while facilitating the exercise of the Board’s responsibilities.

The Board has adopted standards for determining whether a director is independent. These standards are based upon the listing standards of the New York Stock Exchange and applicable laws and regulations, and are available on the Company’s website as described above. The Board has affirmatively determined, based on these standards, that the following directors, two of whom are standing for election to the Board, are independent: Mr.Messrs. Bell, Ms. Chandy, and Messrs. Cook, Hermance, Milzcik, Mrozek, Parry, Satterthwaite and Tokarz.Tokarz, and Ms. Warner. The Board has also determined that Mr. HermanceSilvernail, who is currently serving as a Class II director is not standing for election this year. Theto the Board, has determined that Mr. Silvernail is not independent. Mr. Silvernail is the Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company. The Board has also determined that all Board standing committees are composed entirely of independent directors.

Important functions of the Board are performed by committees comprised of members of the Board. Subject to applicable provisions of the Company’s By-laws and based on the recommendations of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, the Board as a whole appoints the members of each committee each year at its first meeting. The Board may, at any time, appoint or remove committee members or change the authority or responsibility delegated to any committee, subject to applicable law and listing standards. There are three standing committees of the Board: the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, the Audit Committee, and the Compensation Committee. Each committee has a written charter that is available on the Company’s website as described above.

The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee’s primary purpose and responsibilities are to: develop and recommend to the Board corporate governance principles and a code of business conduct and ethics; develop and recommend criteria for selecting new directors; identify individuals qualified to become directors consistent with criteria approved by the Board, and recommend to the Board such individuals as nominees to the Board for its approval; make recommendations to the Board regarding any director who submits an offer of resignation by reason of the plurality plus voting standard under the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines; screen and recommend to the Board individuals qualified to become Chief Executive Officer and any other senior officer whom the committee may wish to approve; and oversee evaluations of the Board, individual Board members and Board committees. The members of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee are Mr.Messrs. Bell and Tokarz, and Ms. Chandy and Mr. Tokarz.Warner. During 2011,2013, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee held twothree meetings.

It is the policy of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee to consider nominees for the Board recommended by the Company’s stockholders in accordance with the procedures described under STOCKHOLDER“STOCKHOLDER PROPOSALS AND DIRECTOR NOMINATIONS FOR 20132015 ANNUAL MEETING.MEETING” below. Stockholder nominees who are nominated in accordance with these procedures will be given the same consideration as nominees for director from other sources.

The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee selects nominees for the Board who demonstrate the following qualities:

Experience(in one or more of the following):

9

Personal attributes:

Qualified candidates for membership on the Board are identified and considered based on the qualities described above, without regard to race, color, religion, sex, ancestry, national origin or disability. In the past, the Company has engaged executive search firms to help identify and facilitate the screening and interviewing of director candidates. After conducting an initial evaluation of a candidate, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee will interview that candidate if it believes the candidate suitable to be a director. The Committee may also ask the candidate to meet with other members of the Board. If the Committee believes a candidate would be a valuable addition to the Board, of Directors, it will recommend to the full Board appointment or election of that candidate. Annually, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee reviews the qualifications and backgrounds of the directors, as well as the overall composition of the Board, and recommends to the full Board the slate of directors for nomination for election at the annual meeting of stockholders.

The Audit Committee’s primary duties and responsibilities are to: monitor the integrity of the Company’s financial reporting process and systems of internal control regarding finance, accounting and legal compliance; monitor the independence and performance of the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm and monitor the performance of the Company’s internal audit function;and compliance functions; hire and fire the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm and approve any audit and non-audit work performed by the independent registered public accounting firm; provide an avenue of communication among the independent registered public accounting firm, management and the Board of Directors;Board; prepare the report that the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) require to be included in the Company’s annual proxy statement; and administer the Company’s Related Person Transactions Policy (see Transactions“Transactions With Related Persons)Persons” below). The members of the Audit Committee are Ms. Chandy and Messrs. Cook, Mrozek, Parry and Satterthwaite. Effective April 8, 2014, Mr. Satterthwaite will cease to be a member, and Mr. Milzcik will become a member of the Audit Committee. The Board of Directors has determined that each of Messrs. Cook and Mrozek is an “audit committee financial expert,” as defined by the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission.SEC. During 2011,2013, the Audit Committee held 10 meetings.

The Compensation Committee’s primary duties and responsibilities are to: establish the Company’s compensation philosophy and structure the Company’s compensation programs to be consistent with that philosophy; establish the compensation of the Chief Executive Officer and other senior officers of the Company;officers; develop and recommend to the Board of Directors compensation for the Board;directors; and prepare the compensation committee report the rules of the Securities and Exchange CommissionSEC require to be included in the Company’s annual proxy statement. The members of the Compensation Committee are Messrs. Bell, Hermance, Milzcik and Tokarz. Effective April 8, 2014, Mr. Hermance who is currently serving asMilzcik will cease to be a Class II director is not standing for election this year.member, and Mr. Satterthwaite and Ms. Warner will become members of the Compensation Committee. During 2011,2013, the Compensation Committee held sixthree meetings.

During 2011, each memberTo assist the Compensation Committee in discharging its responsibilities, the Compensation Committee retained Towers Watson to act as an outside consultant. Towers Watson is engaged by, and reports directly to, the Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee has reviewed the nature of the Boardrelationship between itself and Towers Watson, including all personal and business relationships between the committee members, Towers Watson and the individual compensation consultants who provide advice to the Compensation Committee. Based on its review the Compensation Committee did not identify any actual or potential conflicts of Directorsinterest in Towers Watson’s engagement as an independent consultant. Towers Watson works with the Compensation Committee and management to structure the Company’s compensation programs and evaluate the

10

competitiveness of its executive compensation levels. Towers Watson’s primary areas of assistance to the Compensation Committee are:

Towers Watson periodically provides the Compensation Committee and management market data on a variety of compensation-related topics. The Compensation Committee authorized Towers Watson to interact with the Company’s management, as needed, on behalf of the Compensation Committee, to obtain or confirm information.

During 2013, each director attended more than 75% of the aggregate number of meetings of the Board of Directors and of committees of the Board of which he or she was a member. The Company encourages its directors to attend the Annual Meetingannual meeting of Stockholdersstockholders but has no formal policy with respect to that attendance. All of the directors attended the 20112013 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

10

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

During 2011,2013, Messrs. Bell, Hermance, Milzcik and Tokarz served as the members of the Compensation Committee. Neither Mr. Bell, Mr. Hermance, Mr. Milzcik nor Mr. Tokarz (i) was an officer or employee of the Company or any of its subsidiaries during 2011,2013, (ii) was formerly an officer of the Company or any of its subsidiaries, or (iii) had any relationship requiring disclosure by the Company under Item 404 of Regulation S-K under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. There were no relationships between the Company’s executive officers and the members of the Compensation Committee that require disclosure under Item 407(e)(4) of Regulation S-K.

Transactions with Related Persons

The Board of Directors has adopted a written Related Person Transactions Policy regarding the review, approval and ratification of transactions with related persons. All related person transactions are approved by the Audit Committee. If the transaction involves a related person who is a director or immediate family member of a director, that director will not be included in the deliberations.deliberations regarding approval. In approving the transaction, the Audit Committee must determine that the transaction is fair and reasonable to the Company.

Compensation of Directors

The objectives forof our non-management director compensation program are to attract highly-qualified individuals to serve on our boardBoard of directorsDirectors and align our directors’ interests with the interests of our stockholders. The Compensation Committee reviews the program at least annually to ensure that it continues to meet these objectives.

The Company believes that to attract and retain qualified directors, pay levels should be targeted at the 50th percentile (or median) of pay levels for directors at comparable companies. From time to time, the Compensation Committee, with the assistance of TowersWatson,Towers Watson, evaluates the competitiveness of director compensation. The primary reference point for the determination of market pay is the peer group of companies used to benchmark the Company’s executive compensation. SeeFor further details on this topic, refer to “Market Benchmarking” under EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION.“Compensation Process and Oversight” in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis below. Market composite data derived from pay surveys available to Towers Watson and directly to the Company is also used.

11

Our non-management director compensation for 20112013 was based on the following:

For 2012, annual retainer and meeting fees were increased to $65,000. Equity compensation was increased to $127,500 upon initial election to the Board, and $85,000 annually. Committee Chair retainers were increased as follows: Audit Committee — $15,000; Compensation Committee — $10,000; and Nominating and Governance Committee — $8,000. Additionally, Lead Director annual compensation was set at $30,000, to be paid 50% in cash and 50% in equity.

Equity grants upon initial election to the Board of Directors are made on the date of appointment. Annual equity grants are made on the first regularly scheduled meeting of the Board of Directors held

11

each year. All grants are structured to provide approximately 50% of the expected value in the form of stock options and 50% of the expected value in the form of restricted stock awards, and are made under the IDEX Corporation Incentive Award Plan (Incentive Award Plan). The exercise price of each option is equal to the closing price of the Company’s Common Stock on the trading day the option is granted. The options become exercisable one year following their date of grant. The restricted stock vests in full on the earlierearliest of the third anniversary of the grant, failure of the director to be re-elected to the Board, or a change in control.control of the Company. The restricted stock is non-transferable until the recipient is no longer serving as a director, and is subject to forfeiture if the director terminates service as a director for reasons other than death, disability or retirement prior to vesting.retirement.

Under the Company’s Directors Deferred Compensation Plan, directors are permitted to defer their cash compensation as of the date their compensation would otherwise be payable. In general, directors must make elections to defer fees payable during a calendar year by the end of the preceding calendar year. Newly elected directors have up to 30 days to elect to defer future fees. All amounts deferred are recorded in a memorandum account for each director and are credited or debited with earnings or losses as if such amounts had been invested in either an interest-bearing account or receive an investment return as if the funds were invested in certain mutual funds, as selected byat the option of the director. The deferred compensation credited to the interest-bearing account is adjusted on at least a quarterly basis with hypothetical earnings equal to the lesser of the Barclays Capital Long Term Bond AAA — Corporate Bond Index as of the first business day in November of the calendar year preceding the year for which the earnings are to be credited or 120% of the long-term applicable Federal rate (AFR) as of the first business day ofin November. In accordance with SEC rules, no earnings on deferred compensation are shown in the Director Compensation table below because no “above market” rates were earned on deferred amounts in 2011.2013. Directors must elect irrevocably to receive the deferred funds either in a lump sum or in equal annual installments of up to 10 years, and to begin receiving distributions either at termination of Board service or at a future specified date. If a director should die before all amounts credited under the Directors Deferred Compensation Plan have been paid, the unpaid balance in the participating director’s account will be paid to the director’s beneficiary. The memorandum accounts are not funded, and the right to receive future payments of amounts recorded in these accounts is an unsecured claim against the Company’s general assets. Messrs. Satterthwaite and Tokarz currently defer all of their director fees into the Directors Deferred Compensation Plan.

Outside

12

Non-management directors are subject to stock ownership guidelines. OutsideNon-management directors must comply with the guidelines within five years of their initial election to the Board. The guidelines dictate that all outsidenon-management directors must purchase or acquire shares of the Company’s Common Stock having an aggregate value at the time of purchase or acquisition equal to three times the annual retainer in effect upon their election to the Board. As of December 31, 2011,2013, all directors either complied with the ownership guidelines or were proceeding towards meeting the ownership guidelines within the applicable five-year period.

12

The following table summarizes the total compensation earned in 20112013 for the Company’s non-management directors. Neil SpringerRuby Chandy served as a director from January 1, 20112013 until hisher retirement on April 5, 2011. He received $15,0009, 2013. She earned $16,250 for hisher services as a director. Lawrence Kingsley served as a non-management director from October 3, 2011 until December 31, 2011. He received a lump-sum payment of $75,000 on December 31, 2011 for such services. Mr. Kingsley’s compensation for 2011, for both his service as the Chief Executive Officer and as a director, is reported in the Summary Compensation Table below. Mr. Silvernail receives no additional compensation for his service as a director.

20112013 Director Compensation

13

13

14

For 2014, the annual cash retainer was increased from $65,000 to $75,000, the annual equity award was increased from $85,000 to $110,000, and the initial equity award was reduced from 150% of the annual award to pro-ration of the annual award. Additionally, the equity awards are now granted 100% in restricted stock and the equity ownership guidelines were increased to five times the annual cash retainer (achievable in five years).

Communications with the Board of Directors

Stockholders and other interested parties may contact the Board, the non-management directors as a group or any of the individual directors, including the Lead Director, by writing to Frank J. Notaro, Vice President - General Counsel and Secretary, IDEX Corporation, 1925 West Field Court, Suite 200, Lake Forest, Illinois 60045. Inquiries sent by mail will be reviewed, sorted and summarized by Mr. Notaro before they are forwarded to any director.

15

SECURITY OWNERSHIP

The following table furnishes information as of February 17, 2012,14, 2014, except as otherwise noted, with respect to shares of the Company’s Common Stock beneficially owned by (i) each director and nominee for director, (ii) each officer named in the Summary Compensation Table, (iii) directors, nominees and executive officers of the Company as a group, and (iv) any person who is known by the Company to be a beneficial owner of more than five percent of the outstanding shares of Common Stock. Except as indicated by the notes to the following table, the holders listed below have sole voting power and investment power over the shares beneficially held by them. Under Securities and Exchange CommissionSEC rules, the number of shares shown as beneficially owned includes shares of Common Stock subject to options that are exercisable currently or will be exercisable within 60 days of February 17, 2012.14, 2014. Shares of Common Stock subject to options that are exercisable within 60 days of February 17, 2012,14, 2014, are considered to be outstanding for the purpose of determining the percentage of the shares held by a holder, but not for the purpose of computing the percentage held by others. An * indicates ownership of less than one percent of the outstanding Common Stock. For purposes of the following table, the addresses for each of the directors, nominees and executive officers of the Company is c/o 1925 West Field Court, Suite 200, Lake Forest, Illinois 60045.

16

16

Mr. Silvernail was awarded 5,310 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on February 24, 2009, which vest on February 24, 2012; 5,670 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on March 2, 2010, which vest on March 2, 2013; 4,540 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on February 22, 2011, which vest on February 22, 2014; and 43,441 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on August 10, 2011, which vest on August 10, 2014; 18,670 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on February 21, 2012, which vest on February 21, 2015; 18,505 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on February 15, 2013, which vest on February 15, 2016; and 9,320 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on February 13, 2014, which vest on February 13, 2017; provided he is employed by the Company on such vesting dates.

Mr. Mitts was awarded 3,530 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on February 24, 2009, which vest on February 24, 2012; 2,920 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on March 2, 2010, which vest on March 2, 2013; and 17,130 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on February 22, 2011, which vest on February 22, 2014; 5,840 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on February 21, 2012, which vest on February 21, 2015; 4,560 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on February 15, 2013, which vest on February 15, 2016; and 2,225 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on February 13, 2014, which vest on February 13, 2017; provided he is employed by the Company on such vesting dates.

Mr. Hostetler was awarded 5,310 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on February 24, 2009, which vest on February 24, 2012. Mr. Hostetler forfeited his March 2, 2010 (5,670 shares) and February 22, 2011 (4,540 shares) restricted stock awards when he resigned as an officer on February 14, 2012.

Mr. Notaro was awarded 10,140 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on February 24, 2009, which vest on February 24, 2012; 6,300 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on March 2, 2010, which vest on March 2, 2013; and 9,340 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on February 22, 2011, which vest on February 22, 2014; 5,840 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on February 21, 2012, which vest on February 21, 2015; 2,600 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on February 15, 2013, which vest on February 15, 2016; and 930 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on February 13, 2014, which vest on February 13, 2017; provided he is employed by the Company on such vesting dates.

Mr. YatesBucklew was awarded 2,9803,220 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on March 5, 2012, which vest on March 5, 2015; 1,985 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on February 24, 2009,15, 2013, which vest on February 24, 2012; 2,68015, 2016; and 1,235 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on March 2, 2010,February 13, 2014, which vest on March 2, 2013; and 9,790February 13, 2017; provided he is employed by the Company on such vesting dates.

Mr. Salliotte was awarded 2,380 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on February 22, 2011, which vest on February 22, 2014; 3,500 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on February 21, 2012, which vest on February 21, 2015; 1,820 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on February 15, 2013, which vest on February 15, 2016; and 520 shares of restricted stock under the Incentive Award Plan on February 13, 2014, which vest on February 13, 2017; provided he is employed by the Company on such vesting dates.

17

The restricted shares held by Messrs. Silvernail, Mitts, Hostetler, Notaro, Bucklew and YatesSalliotte may vest earlier than the dates indicated above upon a change in control of the Company and certain other events. See “Outstanding Equity Awards at 20112013 Fiscal Year End” under EXECUTIVE“EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION.”

All shares of restricted stock are eligible for dividends.

1718

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Risk Assessment

AtThe Compensation Committee periodically reviews the Compensation Committee’s direction, management conducted a risk assessment of the Company’spotential risks arising from our compensation policies, practices and practices for its executiveprograms to determine whether any potential risks are material to the Company. In approving the 2013 compensation program design, for 2011the Compensation Committee engaged in discussions with its independent compensation consultant and beyond. The Committee reviewed and discussed the findings of the assessmentmanagement regarding any potential risks and concluded that the Company’s compensation policies and practices are designed with the appropriate balance of risk and reward in relation to the Company’s overall business strategy, do not incent executivesincentivize employees, including executive officers, to take unnecessary or excessive risks, and that any risks arising from the Company’s policies and practices are not reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on the Company. In the review, managementthe Compensation Committee considered the attributes of the Company’s policies and practices, including:

Compensation Committee Report

The Compensation Committee has reviewed the following Compensation Discussion and Analysis and discussed its contents with management. Based on this review and discussion, the Compensation Committee recommended to the Board that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in this Proxy Statement.

Michael T. Tokarz, Chairman

Bradley J. Bell

Frank S. Hermance

Gregory F. Milzcik

1819

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

Executive Summary

We started 2013 with the objective of Fiscal Year 2011

IDEX is a performance-driven, financially focused company that has a long track recordexecuting against our strategic priorities and we are proud of consistently delivering increased value to our stockholders. We delivered strong operating results for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011.results. The following are 2013 financial highlights:

A number of these financial highlights and significant recent accomplishments are directly tied to performance metrics under our executive compensation plans. For 2013, the executive compensation programs were designed to directly link compensation opportunities to the financial performance metrics that we believe are the best measures of success in our business: earnings per share, cash flow conversion, organic sales growth and total shareholder return. The changes we made in the 2013 executive compensation programs were designed to meet the goals defined by the Compensation Committee at the beginning of the review process: tighten the linkage between performance and pay, and minimize subjectivity. To meet these goals, for 2013, the Compensation Committee:

20

Linkage Between Performance and Executive Pay

The compensation opportunities of our executives are directly tied to the performance of the Company. Our reported diluted EPSpay-for-performance philosophy is demonstrated by the following elements of $2.32our executive compensation program for 2013:

Beyond our strong financial performance, IDEX executed wellconversion, organic sales growth, and total shareholder return (measured on a number of initiatives for 2011 that were established to position IDEX for long term growth and success.

Say on PayOur Executive Compensation Governance Practices

At the Company’s 2011 annual meeting of stockholders, the Company held an advisory vote onOur executive compensation (say-on-pay), thereby affording stockholders the opportunity to cast an advisory vote on the compensation programs for our Named Executive Officers (NEOs). The result of say-on-pay indicated stockholder approval of the compensation paid to our NEOs. The Compensation Committee believes this affirms stockholders’ support of the Company’s approach to executive compensation,policies and did not change its approach. Key elements of that approachpractices include the following:following features, which illustrate our commitment to the principles stated above:

21

19

The Company held an advisory vote on executive compensation (say-on-pay) at the Company’s 2013 Annual Meeting of Stockholders. The say-on-pay advisory vote received support from over 94% of the shares voted at the Annual Meeting. The Compensation Committee believes this affirms stockholders’ support of the Company’s approach to executive compensation. The Compensation Committee will continue to consider the outcome of the Company’s say-on-pay votes when making future compensation decisions for the NEOs.

Leadership Transition

In August 2011, Lawrence Kingsley resigned as President and CEO, but remained asnamed executive Chairman through October 2, 2011, and non-executive Chairman from October 3, 2011 through December 31, 2011. Upon his resignation, all unvested equity awards were forfeited, consistent with current executive compensation programs and practices. In connection with the transition and in order to induce Mr. Kingsley to provide transition support, Mr. Kingsley continued to receive his normal salary until October 2, 2011, but forfeited his annual bonus opportunity. Additionally, he received $75,000 for his services as non-executive Chairman of the Board from October 3, 2011 through December 31, 2011, and a lump-sum cash payment of $500,000 on December 31, 2011 for transition services. Mr. Kingsley stepped down as non-executive Chairman on December 31, 2011.

Andrew Silvernail replaced Mr. Kingsley as President and CEO in August 2011, and as Chairman in January 2012. In connection with Mr. Silvernail’s appointment, we entered into an employment agreement with him which is in line with our existing executive compensation structure, and provides him with a competitive package while being mindful of current executive compensation best practices. Specifically, in entering into Mr. Silvernail’s two-year (no automatic renewal) contract, the Committee eliminated the tax gross-ups, inducement award accelerated vesting, and country club membership available to the prior CEO.

In February 2011, Dominic Romeo retired as CFO. As discussed in last year’s proxy, the Company agreed to pay Mr. Romeo a pro rata target bonus for 2011 as part of his retirement package. Otherwise Mr. Romeo received only his base salary through his retirement date in 2011.

Heath Mitts replaced Mr. Romeo as CFO in March 2011. In connection with Mr. Mitts’ promotion to CFO, Michael Yates, our Chief Accounting Officer, undertook additional responsibilities. As a result of these promotions, Messrs. Mitts’ and Yates’ base salaries and target annual incentives were increased, and they received promotion equity grants to bring their compensation in line with market for their positions. Additionally, Messrs. Notaro and Yates received retention equity grants intended to retain them given the other executive transitions. Messrs. Mitts’, Notaro’s and Yates’ promotion and retention option grants contained more restrictive vesting terms than our standard grants.

As a result of their terminations, the following discussion does not include Messrs. Kingsley’s or Romeo’s compensation, unless relevant in discussing the compensation of our current CEO, CFO or other NEOs.officers.

2022

Philosophy and OverviewObjectives of Our Executive Compensation Program

The Company’s executive compensation philosophy is that its compensation program shouldshould: (1) align the interests of management and stockholders, (2) motivate and retain the management team, and (3) result in executives holding meaningful amounts of the Company’s Common Stock.

Compensation Process and Oversight

Role of Compensation Committee and Data Used.The Compensation Committee establishes the Company’s compensation philosophy, structures the Company’s compensation programs to be consistent with that philosophy, and approves each element of named executive officer (NEO) compensation. In the case of the CEO, the Board of Directors approves compensation recommendations made by the Compensation Committee.

The Compensation Committee performs periodic reviews of executive pay tally sheets. The tally sheets outline each executive’s annual target and actual pay, unvested equity holdings and termination payments under various scenarios. Data from the tally sheets is considered by the Compensation Committee when setting target total compensation. Generally, the Compensation Committee reviews and adjusts target total compensation levels annually. Actual total compensation may vary from target based on performance and changes in stock price over time.

2123

Generally, the amount of compensation realized historically, or potentially realizable in the future, from past equity awards does not directly impact the level at which future pay opportunities are set. When granting equity awards, the Compensation Committee reviews market data and individual performance.

Market Benchmarking. The Compensation Committee reviews data from various sources (as discussed below) as one input in determining appropriate target compensation levels. Individual pay decisions are made on the basis of individual performance, years of experience, skill set, value of the position (or the individual) to the organization, as well as the market data. The Compensation Committee believes that, to attract and retain qualified management, total direct compensation should be competitively targeted within a range of +/- 20% of the 50th percentile (Targeted Range) of market for comparable positions at comparable companies. However, cases may exist where these target compensation levels fall outside this range based on the individual factors listed above. Actual compensation should and does vary from target based on Company and individual performance. For 2013, compensation levels for the NEOs were within the Targeted Range.

The Compensation Committee undertook a review and analysis to ensure that the 2013 executive compensation programs appropriately reflected the market for talent. The Committee considered relevant market pay practices to ensure the Company’s ability to recruit and retain high performing talent across its diversified markets and global footprint. Two surveys and a peer group analysis were utilized for the 2013 executive compensation market analysis for the NEOs:

24

The Compensation Committee believes that multiple data sources provide for a clearer perspective of the market. As such, with the assistance of Towers Watson, the Committee developed an aggregate composite of the market data to establish target compensation levels for the executives weighted as follows:

Process of Setting Compensation. The CEO’s pay package is developed by the Compensation Committee based on the financial and operating performance of the Company, the Committee’s assessment of his individual performance and based on a thorough review of the market benchmarking data identified above. The CEO pay recommendations put forth by the Compensation Committee are then reviewed and approved by the Board of Directors. The pay packages for the other NEOs are set by the Compensation Committee based on the recommendations of the CEO. The Compensation Committee considers the CEO’s recommendations, taking into account each NEO’s individual responsibility, experience and overall performance, as well as internal comparisons of pay within the executive group and the market benchmarking data. The Compensation Committee utilizes the expertise of its compensation consultant, Towers Watson, in developing compensation recommendations for the named executive officers, including the CEO.

In developing compensation programs, the Compensation Committee reviews the estimated accounting and tax impact of all elements of the executive compensation program. Generally, an accounting expense is accrued over the requisite service period of the particular pay element (generally equal to the performance period) and the Company realizes a tax deduction upon payment to, or realization by, the executive. The Compensation Committee has been advised that cash awards, performance stock units and stock options granted under the Incentive Award Plan should satisfy the requirements for performance-based compensation under Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Section 162(m). The Compensation Committee has been advised that restricted stock awards (which vest based on continued employment with the Company) do not qualify as performance-based compensation and, therefore, may not be tax-deductible as a result of the limitations of IRC Section 162(m).

IRC Section 162(m) limits the tax deductibility by the Company of annual compensation in excess of $1,000,000 paid to the CEO and any of the three other most highly compensated executive officers, other than the CFO. While the tax impact of any compensation arrangement is one factor to be considered, that impact is evaluated in light of the Compensation Committee’s overall compensation philosophy and objectives. While it is a goal of the Compensation Committee to maximize the deductibility of executive compensation, the Committee retains the discretion to compensate officers in

25

a manner commensurate with performance and the competitive environment for executive talent. Accordingly, the Compensation Committee may award compensation to the executive officers that is not fully deductible if it determines the compensation is consistent with its philosophy and is in the Company’s and its stockholders’ best interests.

Our 2013 Executive Compensation Program

The following discussion describes our 2013 compensation elements and 2013 compensation decisions related to our NEOs. Our NEOs consist of our Chief Executive Officer, our Chief Financial Officer and our three other most highly compensated executive officers. For 2013, our named executive officers are Andrew K. Silvernail, our Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer; Heath A. Mitts, our Vice President and Chief Financial Officer; Frank J. Notaro, our Vice President – General Counsel and Secretary; Jeffrey D. Bucklew, our Chief Human Resources Officer; and Daniel J. Salliotte, our Vice President Mergers, Acquisitions and Treasury.

2013 Key Compensation Elements

. The material elements of 20112013 compensation for the NEOs in the Summary Compensation Table, including Andrew K. Silvernail, who is our current CEO, and Heath A. Mitts, who is our current CFO, are outlined below:

The Compensation Committee targets the following approximate mix of annual compensation for the CEO and other NEOs:

Maintaining a balanced perspective is a core part of the Company’s business strategy. While short-term performance is vital to the financial well-being of the Company, the long-term health of the Company requires the appropriate emphasis on new products, technologies and investments that will enable future growth and deliver long-term stockholder value. The latter requires that employees take calculated risks to capitalize on anticipated changes in the Company’s numerous businesses. The Company believes targeting total direct compensation to within a range of +/- 20% of 50th percentile of market competitively positions the pay of its executives. The CompanyCompensation Committee believes that balancing the proportion of cash and non-cash awards, as well as short-term versus long-term awards, is important to motivate performance while mitigating risk. Cash-based awards are important in motivating

22

executives for the short-term, while long-term incentives focus executives with the greatest ability to impact business results on managing the business for the long-term, and reinforce the link between their earnings opportunity and the long-term growth of the Company. Actual compensation may fall outside the targeted range based on a variety of factors, including individual performance, additional responsibilities and length of tenure in a particular position.

Role of Compensation Committee and Data Used

The Compensation Committee establishes the Company’s compensation philosophy, structures the Company’s compensation programs to be consistent with that philosophy, and approves each element of each executive officer’s compensation. In the case of the CEO, the Board ratifies compensation determinations made by the Compensation Committee.

The Compensation Committee performs periodic reviews of executive pay tally sheets. The tally sheets outline each executive’s annual pay — target and actual — and total accumulated wealth under various performance and employment scenarios. Data from the tally sheets is considered by the Compensation Committee when setting target total compensation. Generally, the Compensation Committee reviews and adjusts target total compensation levels annually. Actual total compensation may vary from target based on Company and individual performance, and changes in stock price over time.

Generally, the amount of compensation realized historically, or potentially realizable in the future, from past equity awards does not directly impact the level at which future pay opportunities are set. When granting equity awards, the Compensation Committee reviews both individual performance and the positioning of previously granted equity awards within established grant ranges.

To assist the Compensation Committee in discharging its responsibilities, the Compensation Committee retained TowersWatson to act as an outside consultant. TowersWatson is engaged by, and reports directly to, the Compensation Committee. TowersWatson works with the Compensation Committee and management to structure the Company’s compensation programs and evaluate the competitiveness of its executive compensation levels. TowersWatson’s primary areas of assistance to the Compensation Committee are:

TowersWatson periodically provides the Compensation Committee and management market data on a variety of compensation-related topics. The Compensation Committee authorized TowersWatson to interact with the Company’s management, as needed, on behalf of the Compensation Committee, to obtain or confirm information.

Market Benchmarking

The Compensation Committee reviews data from various sources (discussed below) as one input in determining appropriate target compensation levels. Individual pay decisions are made on the basis of individual performance, years of experience, skill set, perceived value of the position (or the individual) to the organization, as well as the market data. The Compensation Committee believes that, to attract and retain qualified management, total direct compensation should be targeted within a range of +/- 20% of 50th percentile (Targeted Range) of market for comparable positions at comparable companies. However, cases may exist where such target pay levels fall outside this range based on the individual factors listed above. Actual pay should and does vary from target based on Company and individual performance. For 2011, pay levels for the NEOs were within the Targeted Range.

23

The Compensation Committee undertook a review and analysis to ensure that its 2011 executive compensation programs appropriately reflected its market for talent. The Committee considered relevant market pay practices to ensure the Company’s ability to recruit and retain high performing talent across its diversified markets and global footprint. Two main sources of market data were selected for the 2011 executive compensation analysis for the NEOs:

The Compensation Committee believes that multiple data sources provide for a clearer perspective of the market. As such, they developed an aggregate composite, with the support of TowersWatson, of the market data to establish target compensation levels for the executives weighted as follows:

2426

Process of Setting Compensation

The CEO’s pay package is set by the Compensation Committee during executive session based on the financial and operating performance of the Company and the Committee’s assessment of his individual performance and experience. The pay packages for the other NEOs are set by the Compensation Committee based on the recommendations of the CEO. The Compensation Committee considers the CEO’s recommendations, taking into account each NEOs individual responsibility, experience and overall performance, as well as internal comparisons of pay within the executive group. As discussed above, each of Messrs. Silvernail’s, Mitts’ and Yates’ compensation was increased to reflect their promotions and to bring them in line with the Targeted Range for their new positions.

In setting compensation, the Compensation Committee reviews the estimated accounting and tax impact of all elements of the executive compensation program. Generally, an accounting expense is accrued over the requisite service period of the particular pay element (generally equal to the performance period) and the Company realizes a tax deduction upon payment to, or realization by, the executive. The Compensation Committee has been advised that cash bonus awards and stock options granted under the Incentive Award Plan should satisfy the requirements for performance-based compensation under Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Section 162(m). The Compensation Committee has been advised that restricted stock awards (which vest based on continued employment with the Company) do not qualify as performance-based compensation and, therefore, may not be tax-deductible under IRC Section 162(m).

A goal of the Compensation Committee is to comply with the requirements of IRC Section 162(m). IRC Section 162(m) limits the tax deductibility by the Company of annual compensation in excess of $1,000,000 paid to the CEO and any of the three other most highly compensated executive officers, other than the CFO. While the tax impact of any compensation arrangement is one factor to be considered, that impact is evaluated in light of the Compensation Committee’s overall compensation philosophy and objectives. The Compensation Committee considers ways to maximize the deductibility of executive compensation, while retaining the discretion it deems necessary to compensate officers in a manner commensurate with performance and the competitive environment for executive talent. The Compensation Committee may award compensation to the executive officers that is not fully deductible if it determines the compensation is consistent with its philosophy and is in the Company’s and stockholders’ best interests.

Base Salary

Salary.Base salaries are reviewed annually and may be adjusted to reflect Company performance and individual responsibility and performance,market data, as well as market data. Base salary is targeted to within a range of +/- 20% of the 50th percentile of the market. For 2011, base salaries were within the Targeted Range for each NEO.individual responsibility, experience and tenure.

Short-Term Incentives — Annual Bonus

Management Incentive Compensation PlanPlan.

All NEOs, other than Messrs. Silvernail and Hostetler,Notaro, participated in the Company’s Management Incentive Compensation Plan (MICP). The MICP provides participants with the opportunity to earn annual cash bonuses. Annual cash bonuses underAs compared to the 2012 MICP, are targeted to within +/- 20%we eliminated the qualitative objectives and the personal performance modifier from the 2013 MICP thereby focusing solely on measurable performance objectives and resulting in a tightening of the 50th percentile of the market, with higher payouts for over-performancelinkage between performance and lower payouts for under-performance. For 2011, annual bonus amounts were within the Targeted Range for each NEO who participated in the MICP.pay.

25

The amount of the annual cash bonus paid to each participant under the MICP is determined under the following formula:

Annual Bonus = Base Salary x Individual Target Bonus Percentage x Business Performance Factor x Personal Performance Multiplier

For 2011,2013, the measurable quantitative objectives within the Business Performance Factor were adjusted earnings per share (EPS)EPS and adjusted cash flow conversion. Adjusted EPS excludes from reported earnings per share the impact of acquisition-related income and charges, CEO transition-related compensation adjustments, and restructuring charges (EPS Adjustments). Adjusted cash flow conversion (cashis cash flow as a percent of net income) excludesincome excluding the impact of the EPS Adjustments and the forward starting interest rate swap settlement charges incurred by the Company in connection with its 2011 registered debt offering.Adjustments. The payout of each quantitative objective is a function of the amount by which actual performance exceeds or falls short of goal, with a maximum payout of 200% of target for each objective. The MICP provides thatFor 2013, no bonus iswas payable under the Plan unless thea minimum threshold for adjusted EPS iswas met. The threshold adjusted EPS threshold for 20112013 was established$2.55.

For 2013, the 25% strategic measure was organic sales growth. Organic sales growth is a critical business metric and helps identify the underlying health of the businesses and management’s ability to be $1.97. increase sales through innovation and customer-focus. Organic sales is defined as net sales of the Company adjusted to exclude the impact of foreign currency translation and sales from acquired businesses during the first twelve months of ownership.

For 2011,2013, the relative weightings and actual performance against the quantitative objectives are shown in the table below.

For 2011, the subjectively assessed qualitative objectives within the Business Performance Factor were: global expansion, capital management and deployment, commercial excellence, operational excellence, and organizational development. These measures were targeted to business priorities or initiatives determined by the Compensation Committee and management to address current or future business needs. These measures and goals were established at the beginning of the fiscal year. For 2011, the actual performance against the subjectively based qualitative measures is shown in the table below.

26

The Compensation Committee may, in its discretion, further adjust the Business Performance Factor to account for environmental conditions and adjust for factors (such as acquisition consummation and integration, and performance in a challenging economic environment) not fully reflected in the quantitative and qualitative objectives. Over the past 14 years, the Business Performance Factor for the NEOs participating in the MICP has been at or above 100% for seven years, and below 100% for seven years. For 2011, the performance against the quantitative and qualitative factorsstrategic measure resulted in a recommended Business Performance Factor of 132.5%142%, as shown in the table below.

As indicated, above adjusted EPS and adjusted cash flow conversion far exceeded goals. Organic sales growth results did not meet the targeted level and the MICP calculation reflects those results. Payments under the MICP are included in the 2013 Summary Compensation Table under the “Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation” column.

27

Short-Term Incentives — Incentive Award PlanPlan.

Messrs. Silvernail’s and Hostetler’sNotaro’s annual incentive bonus took the form of a cash performance award under the Company’s Incentive Award Plan. Under the terms of thestockholder-approved Incentive Award Plan the Compensation Committee may grant selected participants the right to receive a cash payment contingent upon achieving performance goals established by the Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee designates the participants, selects the performance criteria and period, and establishes the performance goals and awards which may be earned. Following the completion of the performance period, the Compensation Committee determines whether the performance goals have been achieved. In determining the amount earned by a participant, the Compensation Committee has the right to reduce or eliminate (but not to increase) the amount payable at a given level of performance to take into account additional factors that the Compensation Committee may deem relevant to the assessment of the individual or corporate performance for the period. Messrs. Silvernail and Hostetler were granted cash performance awards rather than an annual cash bonus under the MICP in order to permitallow their deductionbonuses to be deductible under IRC Section 162(m). If Messrs. Silvernail and HostetlerNotaro were participants in the MICP (which is not shareholder approved and permits upward adjustments based on qualitative factors instead of only downward adjustments as permitted under the Company’s Incentive Award Plan), their annual cash bonuses under the MICP would not be a deductible under IRC Section 162(m).

In 2011,2013, the Compensation Committee granted Messrs. Kingsley, Silvernail and HostetlerNotaro cash performance awards with thea maximum aggregate payment amount to all participants equal to 2% of the Company’s 20112013 operating income contingent on the Company achieving anthe same minimum $2.55 adjusted EPS as for other named executive officers under the MICP. Adjusted EPS excludes from earnings per share target for 2011the impact of $1.90.acquisition-related income and charges, and restructuring charges. Under the terms of the award,awards, no bonus would be paid if the Company did not achieve adjusted EPS of $1.90. Mr. Kingsley forfeited his award when he resigned.$2.55. The Compensation Committee set Messrs. Silvernail’s and Hostetler’sNotaro’s actual performance awards for 20112013 at $767,000$1,235,400 and $442,649,$441,000, respectively. In setting the actual awards, the Compensation Committee considered the actual performance of the Company using the metrics in the Business Performance Factor described above, its subjective assessment of Messrs. Silvernail’s and Hostetler’sNotaro’s individual performance and the amountamounts that Messrs. Silvernail and HostetlerNotaro would have earned as an annual cash bonus if they participated in the MICP on substantially the same terms as the other NEOs.NEOs with targets awards of 100% and 75% of their base salaries respectively.

2013 Long-Term Incentives

Incentive Awards. In 2013, NEOs received long-term incentive awards that were granted in three components: performance stock units, stock options and restricted stock. The 2013 total long-term target opportunities are approximately equally weighted among each of the three long-term incentive award components to reflect the Compensation Committee’s belief that relative total shareholder return (TSR), stock price appreciation, retention of executives and executive stock ownership are all important objectives. Long-term incentive awards are issued under the Company’s Incentive Award Plan, which provides that no stock option granted to an NEO may be fully exercisable earlier than three years after its date of grant, and time-based restricted stock awards shall become vested over a period of not less than three years from date of grant. Long-term incentive awards for the NEOs are structured to provide approximately 50% of the expected value in the formpast consisted of only stock options and 50%restricted stock. The performance stock units were added in 2013 to more tightly align pay and performance.

The performance stock units (PSUs) have a three-year performance period and utilize a relative TSR measure. The Company’s relative TSR will be measured against the TSR of companies in the S&P Midcap 400 Industrials Index at the end of the expected valuethree-year performance period. If the Company achieves 50^th percentile TSR performance as compared to the group of companies, each NEO will receive the target number of performance units paid out in