SE vs BABA

For growth investors, Sea Limited (SE) is the stronger pick with 28.

8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 5. 9% for Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA). Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA) offers the better valuation at 18. 0x trailing P/E (4. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Sea Limited (SE) a "Buy" — based on 44 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, Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA) is the cheapest at 18.

0x versus Sea Limited at 123. 3x. On forward P/E, Alibaba Group Holding Limited is actually cheaper at 4. 1x.

Over the past 5 years, Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA) delivered a total return of -35.

5%, compared to -62. 2% for Sea Limited (SE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: SE returned +463. 8% versus BABA's +84. 5%. 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), Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA) is the lower-risk stock at 1.

21β versus Sea Limited's 1. 45β — meaning SE is approximately 20% more volatile than BABA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 23% versus 49% for Sea Limited — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Sea Limited (SE) is pulling ahead at 28.

8% versus 5. 9% for Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Sea Limited grew EPS 192. 0% year-over-year, compared to 70. 9% for Alibaba Group Holding Limited. Over a 3-year CAGR, SE leads at 19. 1% 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.

Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA) is the more profitable company, earning 13.

1% net margin versus 2. 6% for Sea Limited — meaning it keeps 13. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: BABA leads at 14. 1% versus 3. 9% for SE. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — SE leads at 42. 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.

On forward earnings alone, Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA) trades at 4.

1x forward P/E versus 25. 4x for Sea Limited — 21. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for SE: 64. 0% to $147. 67.

In this comparison, BABA (1.

3% yield) pays a dividend. SE does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1.

21), 1. 3% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (BABA: +84. 5%, SE: +463. 8%), 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 Consumer Cyclical sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

In terms of investment character: SE is a mid-cap high-growth stock; BABA is a large-cap deep-value stock. BABA pays a dividend while SE does not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. 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.