Micron Technology vs Nvidia
MU and NVDA 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 NVDA compare
Nvidia is the larger company, worth 4.5 times as much as Micron Technology ($3.9T against $881B).
On earnings, Micron Technology is cheaper: it trades at 10.5× trailing earnings, against 20.6× for Nvidia.
Micron Technology grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (256% versus 83.4% for Nvidia).
Micron Technology keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 63.8% compared with 63.7% at Nvidia.
Both pay dividends: Micron Technology yields 0.07% and Nvidia 0.32%.
Nvidia scores higher on the StockData Score (26 against 25 for Micron Technology), 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 | NVDA |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $881B | $3.9T |
| Share price | $778.31 | $162.85 |
| Change, 1 year | 218% | −16.0% |
| Change, 5 years | 837% | 394% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.93 | 2.02 |
| Employees | 61K | 42K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 25 | 26 (better) |
| Valuation score | 5 | 5 |
| Growth score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Performance score | 6 | 6 |
| Health score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividend score | 4 | 4 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 10.5× (better) | 20.6× |
| P/S | 6.6× (better) | 13.0× |
| P/B | 6.4× (better) | 17.1× |
| EV/EBITDA | 7.7× (better) | 19.6× |
| P/FCF | 14.9× (better) | 30.9× |
| PEG | – | 0.10 |
| FCF yield | 6.7% (better) | 3.2% |
| Fair value | $1851.97 | $306.55 |
| Margin of safety | 58.0% (better) | 46.9% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 256% (better) | 83.4% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 36.9% | 66.9% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 895% (better) | 123% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 879% (better) | 125% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 70.6% | 95.2% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 80.7% (better) | 74.7% |
| Operating margin | 74.6% (better) | 65.2% |
| Net margin | 63.8% (better) | 63.7% |
| FCF margin | 44.3% (better) | 41.9% |
| Return on equity | 88.3% | 117% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 107% | 114% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.04 (better) | 0.15 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.35 | 0.05 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 937× (better) | 427× |
| Current ratio | 3.31 | 4.59 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 12.87 | 30.31 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.07% | 0.32% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 0.72% | 3.5% |
| Years of dividend growth | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 39.6% (better) | 20.1% |
| Buyback yield | 0.07% | 1.4% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 0.15% | 1.7% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 77.7% | 69.7% |
| Held by insiders | 0.22% | 3.7% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$331M (better) | −$1.9B |
| Superinvestors holding | 5 | 11 (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.1% | 1.2% |
Go deeper
- MU stock overview
- MU income statement
- MU valuation and score
- NVDA stock overview
- NVDA income statement
- NVDA valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.