Cisco Systems vs International Business Machines
CSCO and IBM side by side, both in computer and office equipment. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CSCO and IBM compare
Cisco Systems is the larger company, worth 1.7 times as much as International Business Machines ($412B against $243B).
On earnings, International Business Machines is cheaper: it trades at 22.9× trailing earnings, against 31.4× for Cisco Systems.
Cisco Systems grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (11.8% versus 7.9% for International Business Machines).
Cisco Systems keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 21.0% compared with 15.5% at International Business Machines.
Both pay dividends: Cisco Systems yields 1.6% and International Business Machines 2.6%.
International Business Machines scores higher on the StockData Score (18 against 16 for Cisco Systems), 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 | CSCO | IBM |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $412B | $243B |
| Share price | $104.51 | $258.28 |
| Change, 1 year | 46.5% | −17.4% |
| Change, 5 years | 83.1% | 109% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.82 | 0.72 |
| Employees | 25K | – |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 16 | 18 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Growth score | 3 | 3 |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Health score | 3 | 3 |
| Dividend score | 4 | 4 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 31.4× | 22.9× (better) |
| P/S | 6.5× | 3.5× (better) |
| P/B | 8.2× | 7.1× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 27.8× | – |
| P/FCF | 32.3× | 17.6× (better) |
| PEG | 11.43 | 0.27 (better) |
| FCF yield | 3.1% | 5.7% (better) |
| Fair value | $67.84 | $259.58 |
| Margin of safety | −54.1% | 0.50% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 11.8% (better) | 7.9% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.9% (better) | 4.1% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 30.3% | 83.9% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 30.6% | 83.0% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 5.9% | 12.4% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 64.5% (better) | 58.1% |
| Operating margin | 24.3% | – |
| Net margin | 21.0% (better) | 15.5% |
| FCF margin | 20.2% (better) | 20.0% |
| Return on equity | 27.3% | 34.6% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 20.2% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.59 (better) | 1.97 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.99 | – |
| Interest coverage | 10.5× | – |
| Current ratio | 0.93 (better) | 0.79 |
| Altman Z-score | 3.99 (better) | 3.07 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 | 7 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.6% | 2.6% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 49.4% | 58.8% |
| Years of dividend growth | 15 (better) | 9 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 2.6% (better) | 0.61% |
| Buyback yield | 1.3% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 2.9% (better) | 2.6% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 80.6% | 65.1% |
| Held by insiders | 0.07% | 0.10% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$106M | −$5.3M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.3% | 2.6% |
Go deeper
- CSCO stock overview
- CSCO income statement
- CSCO valuation and score
- IBM stock overview
- IBM income statement
- IBM valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.