International Business Machines vs Oracle
IBM and ORCL side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How IBM and ORCL compare
Oracle is the larger company, worth 1.6 times as much as International Business Machines ($395B against $243B).
On earnings, Oracle is cheaper: it trades at 20.5× trailing earnings, against 22.9× for International Business Machines.
Oracle grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (21.6% versus 7.9% for International Business Machines).
Oracle keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 26.4% compared with 15.5% at International Business Machines.
Both pay dividends: International Business Machines yields 2.6% and Oracle 1.5%.
Oracle scores higher on the StockData Score (19 against 18 for International Business Machines), 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 | IBM | ORCL |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $243B | $395B |
| Share price | $258.28 | $130.67 |
| Change, 1 year | −17.4% | −52.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 109% | 37.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.72 | 1.37 |
| Employees | – | 141K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 18 | 19 (better) |
| Valuation score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Growth score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Performance score | 5 | 5 |
| Health score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 22.9× | 20.5× (better) |
| P/S | 3.5× (better) | 5.5× |
| P/B | 7.1× | 5.9× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 15.5× |
| P/FCF | 17.6× | – |
| PEG | 0.27 (better) | 0.86 |
| FCF yield | 5.7% (better) | −7.3% |
| Fair value | $259.58 | $180.22 |
| Margin of safety | 0.50% | 27.5% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 7.9% | 21.6% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.1% | 10.7% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 83.9% (better) | 52.1% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 83.0% (better) | 47.7% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 12.4% (better) | 5.1% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 58.1% | – |
| Operating margin | – | 32.1% |
| Net margin | 15.5% | 26.4% (better) |
| FCF margin | 20.0% (better) | −40.0% |
| Return on equity | 34.6% | 41.6% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | – | 85.0% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.97 | – |
| Interest coverage | – | 4.5× |
| Current ratio | 0.79 | 1.17 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 3.07 (better) | 1.52 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.6% (better) | 1.5% |
| Payout ratio | 58.8% | 31.4% |
| Years of dividend growth | 9 | 17 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 0.61% | 14.0% (better) |
| Buyback yield | – | −5.4% |
| Shareholder yield | 2.6% (better) | −3.9% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 65.1% | 43.0% |
| Held by insiders | 0.10% | 38.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$5.3M (better) | −$85.3M |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 7 (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.6% | 2.6% |
Go deeper
- IBM stock overview
- IBM income statement
- IBM valuation and score
- ORCL stock overview
- ORCL income statement
- ORCL valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.