Salesforce vs Snowflake
CRM and SNOW side by side, both in computer programming, data processing, and other computer related services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CRM and SNOW compare
Salesforce is the larger company, worth 1.7 times as much as Snowflake ($189B against $108B).
Snowflake grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (32.0% versus 11.2% for Salesforce).
Salesforce keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 22.0% compared with −20.1% at Snowflake.
Salesforce pays a dividend yielding 0.76%; Snowflake does not pay one.
Salesforce scores higher on the StockData Score (19 against 9 for Snowflake), 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 | CRM | SNOW |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $189B | $108B |
| Share price | $229.17 | $306.08 |
| Change, 1 year | −8.9% | 13.5% |
| Change, 5 years | −25.4% | −16.1% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.36 | 1.62 |
| Employees | 83K | 2,424 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 19 (better) | 9 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 4 | 4 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 1 |
| Health score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 20.9× | – |
| P/S | 4.3× (better) | 19.9× |
| P/B | 4.9× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 21.2× | – |
| P/FCF | 12.4× (better) | 90.3× |
| PEG | 0.09 | – |
| FCF yield | 8.0% (better) | 1.1% |
| Fair value | $329.02 | – |
| Margin of safety | 30.3% | – |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 11.2% | 32.0% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 14.3% | 51.2% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 45.0% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 59.2% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 12.2% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 77.3% (better) | 67.0% |
| Operating margin | 19.9% (better) | −22.8% |
| Net margin | 22.0% (better) | −20.1% |
| FCF margin | 34.5% (better) | 22.0% |
| Return on equity | 19.4% (better) | −46.0% |
| Return on invested capital | 11.3% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.02 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.73 | – |
| Interest coverage | 8.9× (better) | −148.8× |
| Current ratio | 0.84 | 0.94 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.55 | 8.37 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.76% | – |
| Payout ratio | 15.7% | – |
| Buyback yield | 18.6% (better) | 0.63% |
| Shareholder yield | 19.4% (better) | 0.63% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 86.1% | 78.3% |
| Held by insiders | 4.2% | 2.8% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$6.2M (better) | −$1.2B |
| Superinvestors holding | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Short interest, % of float | 4.2% | 5.2% |
Go deeper
- CRM stock overview
- CRM income statement
- CRM valuation and score
- SNOW stock overview
- SNOW income statement
- SNOW valuation and score
Other comparisons
- CRM vs NOW
- CRM vs ORCL
- CRWD vs SNOW
- CRWV vs SNOW
- MDB vs SNOW
- NOW vs SNOW
- PLTR vs SNOW
- SNOW vs TWLO
- SNOW vs VEEV
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.