Micron Technology vs United Microelectronics
MU and UMC 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 MU and UMC compare
Micron Technology grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (256% versus 2.3% for United Microelectronics).
Micron Technology keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 63.8% compared with 17.0% at United Microelectronics.
Micron Technology pays a dividend yielding 0.06%; United Microelectronics does not pay one.
Micron Technology scores higher on the StockData Score (25 against 9 for United Microelectronics), 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 | MU | UMC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $999B | – |
| Share price | $884.74 | $16.68 |
| Change, 1 year | 290% | 126% |
| Change, 5 years | 1113% | 54.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.88 | 0.86 |
| Employees | 61K | 19K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 25 (better) | 9 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 11.9× | – |
| P/S | 7.5× | – |
| P/B | 7.2× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 8.8× | – |
| P/FCF | 16.9× | – |
| FCF yield | 5.9% | – |
| Fair value | $1920.62 | – |
| Margin of safety | 53.9% | – |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 256% (better) | 2.3% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 36.9% (better) | 6.1% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 895% (better) | −17.3% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 879% (better) | −17.0% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 70.6% (better) | 11.8% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 80.7% (better) | 29.0% |
| Operating margin | 74.6% (better) | 18.5% |
| Net margin | 63.8% (better) | 17.0% |
| FCF margin | 44.3% (better) | 21.9% |
| Return on equity | 88.3% (better) | 11.0% |
| Return on invested capital | 107% (better) | 13.1% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.04 (better) | 0.08 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.35 | −1.89 |
| Interest coverage | 937× (better) | 27.4× |
| Current ratio | 3.31 (better) | 2.29 |
| Altman Z-score | 14.11 | – |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.06% | – |
| Payout ratio | 0.72% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 1 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 39.6% | – |
| Buyback yield | 0.07% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 0.13% | – |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 77.8% | 1.4% |
| Held by insiders | 0.22% | 1.2% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$302M (better) | −$526M |
| Superinvestors holding | 5 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.3% | – |
Go deeper
- MU stock overview
- MU income statement
- MU valuation and score
- UMC stock overview
- UMC income statement
- UMC valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.