MercadoLibre vs Uber Technologies
MELI and UBER side by side, both in miscellaneous business services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How MELI and UBER compare
Uber Technologies is the larger company, worth 1.6 times as much as MercadoLibre ($133B against $82.4B).
On earnings, Uber Technologies is cheaper: it trades at 14.3× trailing earnings, against 44.2× for MercadoLibre.
MercadoLibre grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (46.0% versus 16.7% for Uber Technologies).
Uber Technologies keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 17.3% compared with 5.3% at MercadoLibre.
Uber Technologies scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 13 for MercadoLibre), 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 | MELI | UBER |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $82.4B | $133B |
| Share price | $1624.53 | $65.25 |
| Change, 1 year | −29.2% | −31.9% |
| Change, 5 years | −0.32% | 38.3% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.56 | 1.29 |
| Employees | 20K | 34K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 13 | 16 (better) |
| Valuation score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Growth score | 3 | 3 |
| Performance score | 4 | 4 |
| Health score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 44.2× | 14.3× (better) |
| P/S | 2.3× (better) | 2.4× |
| P/B | 10.5× | 4.9× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 21.4× | 18.9× (better) |
| P/FCF | 6.6× (better) | 13.2× |
| PEG | 0.73 | – |
| FCF yield | 15.1% (better) | 7.6% |
| Fair value | $1648.59 | $99.92 |
| Margin of safety | 1.5% | 34.7% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 46.0% (better) | 16.7% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 48.7% (better) | 36.1% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −9.3% (better) | −24.1% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −9.2% (better) | −22.5% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 42.7% (better) | 42.3% |
| Operating margin | 8.3% | 12.1% (better) |
| Net margin | 5.3% | 17.3% (better) |
| FCF margin | 35.3% (better) | 18.3% |
| Return on equity | 27.5% | 38.4% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 41.3% (better) | 22.1% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.83 | 0.47 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.19 (better) | 0.98 |
| Interest coverage | – | 14.5× |
| Current ratio | 1.12 (better) | 0.84 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.29 | 3.10 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 0.00% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 0 |
| Buyback yield | – | 5.2% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 5.2% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 78.1% | 82.6% |
| Held by insiders | 6.9% | 0.19% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$1.0M | $11.4M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 7 | 11 (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.9% | 2.4% |
Go deeper
- MELI stock overview
- MELI income statement
- MELI valuation and score
- UBER stock overview
- UBER income statement
- UBER valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.