LRCX vs ASML

For growth investors, Lam Research Corporation (LRCX) is the stronger pick with 23.

7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 11. 0% for ASML Holding N. V. (ASML). ASML Holding N. V. (ASML) offers the better valuation at 55. 5x trailing P/E (47. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Lam Research Corporation (LRCX) a "Buy" — based on 50 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.

On trailing P/E, ASML Holding N.

V. (ASML) is the cheapest at 55. 5x versus Lam Research Corporation at 71. 6x. On forward P/E, ASML Holding N. V. is actually cheaper at 47. 8x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: ASML Holding N. V. wins at 1. 94x versus Lam Research Corporation's 2. 35x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.

Over the past 5 years, Lam Research Corporation (LRCX) delivered a total return of +387.

7%, compared to +145. 1% for ASML Holding N. V. (ASML). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LRCX returned +39. 4% versus ASML's +1623%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), ASML Holding N.

V. (ASML) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 91β versus Lam Research Corporation's 2. 54β — meaning LRCX is approximately 33% more volatile than ASML relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, ASML Holding N. V. (ASML) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 14% versus 48% for Lam Research Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Lam Research Corporation (LRCX) is pulling ahead at 23.

7% versus 11. 0% for ASML Holding N. V. (ASML). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Lam Research Corporation grew EPS 43. 1% year-over-year, compared to 23. 3% for ASML Holding N. V.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ASML leads at 14. 0% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.

ASML Holding N.

V. (ASML) is the more profitable company, earning 29. 4% net margin versus 29. 1% for Lam Research Corporation — meaning it keeps 29. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ASML leads at 34. 6% versus 32. 0% for LRCX. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ASML leads at 52. 8%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.

The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.

By this metric, ASML Holding N. V. (ASML) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 94x versus Lam Research Corporation's 2. 35x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, ASML Holding N. V. (ASML) trades at 47. 8x forward P/E versus 52. 6x for Lam Research Corporation — 4. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ASML: 3. 3% to $1595. 20.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

ASML Holding N. V. (ASML) offers the highest yield at 0. 5%, versus 0. 3% for Lam Research Corporation (LRCX).

For long-horizon retirement investors, ASML Holding N.

V. (ASML) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (+1623% 10Y return). Lam Research Corporation (LRCX) carries a higher beta of 2. 54 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ASML: +1623%, LRCX: +39. 4%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.

Both stocks operate in the Technology sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

In terms of investment character: LRCX is a large-cap high-growth stock; ASML is a large-cap quality compounder stock. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.