Applied Materials vs Broadcom
AMAT and AVGO side by side, both in electronic components and accessories. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How AMAT and AVGO compare
Broadcom is the larger company, worth 5.0 times as much as Applied Materials ($1.6T against $310B).
Broadcom grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (48.7% versus 7.8% for Applied Materials).
Both pay dividends: Applied Materials yields 0.51% and Broadcom 0.80%.
Applied Materials scores higher on the StockData Score (19 against 12 for Broadcom), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | AMAT | AVGO |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $310B | $1.6T |
| Share price | $390.09 | $326.08 |
| Change, 1 year | 65.5% | −15.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 154% | 483% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.74 | 1.83 |
| Employees | 37K | 33K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 19 (better) | 12 |
| Valuation score | 1 | 1 |
| Growth score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 33.7× | – |
| P/S | 10.0× (better) | 17.5× |
| P/B | 12.1× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 31.9× (better) | 37.2× |
| P/FCF | 55.1× | 39.5× (better) |
| PEG | 6.48 | – |
| FCF yield | 1.8% | 2.5% (better) |
| Fair value | $284.71 | – |
| Margin of safety | −37.0% | – |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 7.8% | 48.7% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 10.5% | 21.7% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 35.6% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 38.3% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 17.2% | 49.8% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 49.4% | 68.8% (better) |
| Operating margin | 29.6% | 48.0% (better) |
| Net margin | 30.1% | – |
| FCF margin | 18.2% | 44.2% (better) |
| Return on equity | 41.1% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 36.2% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.30 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.15 | 0.83 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 33.0× (better) | 13.7× |
| Current ratio | 2.42 | 2.50 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 14.16 (better) | 12.15 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | – |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.51% | 0.80% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 16.3% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 8 | 9 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 15.4% (better) | 12.7% |
| Buyback yield | 0.66% (better) | 0.54% |
| Shareholder yield | 1.2% | 1.3% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 83.7% | 77.9% |
| Held by insiders | 0.36% | 0.79% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$180M (better) | −$1.2B |
| Superinvestors holding | 11 (better) | 6 |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.7% | 1.1% |
Go deeper
- AMAT stock overview
- AMAT income statement
- AMAT valuation and score
- AVGO stock overview
- AVGO income statement
- AVGO valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.