Semiconductors
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
ALMU vs NVDA vs INTC vs QCOM vs MRVL
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Semiconductors
Semiconductors
Semiconductors
Semiconductors
ALMU vs NVDA vs INTC vs QCOM vs MRVL — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Semiconductors | Semiconductors | Semiconductors | Semiconductors | Semiconductors |
| Market Cap | $439M | $5.23T | $627.10B | $230.92B | $147.33B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $5M | $215.94B | $53.76B | $44.49B | $8.19B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-3M | $120.07B | $-3.17B | $9.92B | $2.67B |
| Gross Margin | 50.2% | 71.1% | 35.4% | 54.8% | 51.0% |
| Operating Margin | -105.0% | 60.4% | -9.4% | 25.5% | 16.1% |
| Forward P/E | — | 26.0x | 116.5x | 20.4x | 44.3x |
| Total Debt | $941K | $11.41B | $46.59B | $16.37B | $4.47B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $4M | $10.61B | $14.27B | $7.84B | $2.64B |
ALMU vs NVDA vs INTC vs QCOM vs MRVL — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Nov 22 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aeluma, Inc. (ALMU) | 100 | 1162.4 | +1062.4% |
| NVIDIA Corporation (NVDA) | 100 | 1272.0 | +1172.0% |
| Intel Corporation (INTC) | 100 | 415.3 | +315.3% |
| QUALCOMM Incorporat… (QCOM) | 100 | 173.2 | +73.2% |
| Marvell Technology,… (MRVL) | 100 | 365.7 | +265.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ALMU vs NVDA vs INTC vs QCOM vs MRVL
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ALMU ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth.
- 407.9% revenue growth vs INTC's -0.5%
NVDA is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 65.5%, EPS growth 66.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 100.0%
- 243.2% 10Y total return vs MRVL's 16.9%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.74, Low D/E 7.3%, current ratio 3.91x
- PEG 0.27 vs QCOM's 9.80
INTC is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +494.7% vs QCOM's +53.4%
QCOM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 23 yrs, beta 1.64, yield 1.6%
- Beta 1.64, yield 1.6%, current ratio 2.82x
- Lower P/E (20.4x vs 44.3x)
- Beta 1.64 vs ALMU's 2.89
Among these 5 stocks, MRVL doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 407.9% revenue growth vs INTC's -0.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (20.4x vs 44.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 55.6% margin vs ALMU's -52.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.64 vs ALMU's 2.89 | |
| Dividends | 1.6% yield, 23-year raise streak, vs NVDA's 0.0%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +494.7% vs QCOM's +53.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 58.1% ROA vs ALMU's -6.4%, ROIC 81.8% vs -18.6% |
ALMU vs NVDA vs INTC vs QCOM vs MRVL — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
ALMU vs NVDA vs INTC vs QCOM vs MRVL — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
NVDA leads in 3 of 6 categories
QCOM leads 2 • ALMU leads 0 • INTC leads 0 • MRVL leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NVDA leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NVDA is the larger business by revenue, generating $215.9B annually — 41298.2x ALMU's $5M. NVDA is the more profitable business, keeping 55.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ALMU's -52.5%. On growth, NVDA holds the edge at +73.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $5M | $215.9B | $53.8B | $44.5B | $8.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$5M | $133.2B | $4.0B | $12.8B | $2.3B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$3M | $120.1B | -$3.2B | $9.9B | $2.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$772,780 | $96.7B | -$3.1B | $12.5B | $1.4B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +50.2% | +71.1% | +35.4% | +54.8% | +51.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -105.0% | +60.4% | -9.4% | +25.5% | +16.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -52.5% | +55.6% | -5.9% | +22.3% | +32.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -14.8% | +44.8% | -5.8% | +28.1% | +17.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -21.1% | +73.2% | +7.2% | -3.5% | +22.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +54.2% | +97.8% | -2.8% | +173.0% | +100.0% |
Valuation Metrics
QCOM leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 43.7x trailing earnings, QCOM trades at a 21% valuation discount to MRVL's 55.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), NVDA offers better value at 0.46x vs QCOM's 21.03x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $439M | $5.23T | $627.1B | $230.9B | $147.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $437M | $5.23T | $659.4B | $239.5B | $149.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -106.13x | 43.92x | -2120.46x | 43.73x | 55.42x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 26.00x | 116.47x | 20.37x | 44.32x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.46x | — | 21.03x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 39.27x | 56.44x | 17.16x | 112.76x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 94.20x | 24.22x | 11.87x | 5.21x | 17.98x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 17.96x | 33.43x | 4.80x | 11.42x | 10.34x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 54.10x | — | 18.01x | 105.51x |
Profitability & Efficiency
NVDA leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
NVDA delivers a 76.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $76 in annual profit, vs $-7 for ALMU. ALMU carries lower financial leverage with a 0.05x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to QCOM's 0.77x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MRVL scores 7/9 vs NVDA's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -6.7% | +76.3% | -2.7% | +40.2% | +19.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -6.4% | +58.1% | -1.6% | +18.4% | +12.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -18.6% | +81.8% | -0.0% | +29.1% | +6.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -19.5% | +97.2% | -0.0% | +28.9% | +7.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 4 | 6 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.05x | 0.07x | 0.37x | 0.77x | 0.31x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$3M | $807M | $32.3B | $8.5B | $1.8B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $4M | $10.6B | $14.3B | $7.8B | $2.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $941,000 | $11.4B | $46.6B | $16.4B | $4.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -3.00x | 545.03x | 3.71x | 17.60x | 15.17x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
NVDA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in NVDA five years ago would be worth $150,908 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $18,229 for QCOM. Over the past 12 months, INTC leads with a +494.7% total return vs QCOM's +53.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NVDA at 94.7% vs QCOM's 28.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +37.1% | +14.0% | +217.2% | +27.2% | +90.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +94.2% | +83.4% | +494.7% | +53.4% | +195.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +510.3% | +638.6% | +307.9% | +111.7% | +316.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +1120.5% | +1409.1% | +129.0% | +82.3% | +286.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +1120.5% | +24324.1% | +350.5% | +382.4% | +1686.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +82.7% | +94.7% | +59.8% | +28.4% | +60.9% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — NVDA and QCOM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
QCOM is the less volatile stock with a 1.64 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ALMU's 2.89 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. NVDA currently trades 98.8% from its 52-week high vs ALMU's 85.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.89x | 1.74x | 2.27x | 1.64x | 2.27x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $28.73 | $217.80 | $130.57 | $228.04 | $175.79 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $10.20 | $115.21 | $18.97 | $121.99 | $56.69 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +85.0% | +98.8% | +95.7% | +96.1% | +96.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 59.3 | 63.4 | 80.5 | 82.6 | 63.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.4M | 160.0M | 113.6M | 15.6M | 24.9M |
Analyst Outlook
QCOM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ALMU as "Buy", NVDA as "Buy", INTC as "Hold", QCOM as "Hold", MRVL as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 28.1% upside for NVDA (target: $276) vs -36.3% for INTC (target: $80). For income investors, QCOM offers the higher dividend yield at 1.57% vs MRVL's 0.14%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $25.00 | $275.74 | $79.55 | $185.56 | $133.10 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 1 | 79 | 84 | 69 | 72 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.0% | — | +1.6% | +0.1% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 2 | 0 | 23 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.04 | — | $3.44 | $0.24 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.8% | 0.0% | +3.8% | +1.4% |
NVDA leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). QCOM leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
ALMU vs NVDA vs INTC vs QCOM vs MRVL: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ALMU or NVDA or INTC or QCOM or MRVL a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Aeluma, Inc.
(ALMU) is the stronger pick with 407. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -0. 5% for Intel Corporation (INTC). QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM) offers the better valuation at 43. 7x trailing P/E (20. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Aeluma, Inc. (ALMU) a "Buy" — based on 1 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.
02Which has the better valuation — ALMU or NVDA or INTC or QCOM or MRVL?
On trailing P/E, QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM) is the cheapest at 43.
7x versus Marvell Technology, Inc. at 55. 4x. On forward P/E, QUALCOMM Incorporated is actually cheaper at 20. 4x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: NVIDIA Corporation wins at 0. 27x versus QUALCOMM Incorporated's 9. 80x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ALMU or NVDA or INTC or QCOM or MRVL?
Over the past 5 years, NVIDIA Corporation (NVDA) delivered a total return of +1409%, compared to +82.
3% for QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NVDA returned +243. 2% versus INTC's +350. 5%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — ALMU or NVDA or INTC or QCOM or MRVL?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM) is the lower-risk stock at 1.
64β versus Aeluma, Inc. 's 2. 89β — meaning ALMU is approximately 77% more volatile than QCOM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Aeluma, Inc. (ALMU) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 5% versus 77% for QUALCOMM Incorporated — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ALMU or NVDA or INTC or QCOM or MRVL?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Aeluma, Inc.
(ALMU) is pulling ahead at 407. 9% versus -0. 5% for Intel Corporation (INTC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Marvell Technology, Inc. grew EPS 401. 0% year-over-year, compared to -44. 2% for QUALCOMM Incorporated. Over a 3-year CAGR, NVDA leads at 100. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — ALMU or NVDA or INTC or QCOM or MRVL?
NVIDIA Corporation (NVDA) is the more profitable company, earning 55.
6% net margin versus -64. 8% for Aeluma, Inc. — meaning it keeps 55. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NVDA leads at 60. 4% versus -45. 9% for ALMU. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NVDA leads at 71. 1%, 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.
07Is ALMU or NVDA or INTC or QCOM or MRVL more undervalued right now?
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, NVIDIA Corporation (NVDA) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 27x versus QUALCOMM Incorporated's 9. 80x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM) trades at 20. 4x forward P/E versus 116. 5x for Intel Corporation — 96. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for NVDA: 28. 1% to $275. 74.
08Which pays a better dividend — ALMU or NVDA or INTC or QCOM or MRVL?
In this comparison, QCOM (1.
6% yield), MRVL (0. 1% yield) pay a dividend. ALMU, NVDA, INTC do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is ALMU or NVDA or INTC or QCOM or MRVL better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (1.
6% yield, +382. 4% 10Y return). Intel Corporation (INTC) carries a higher beta of 2. 27 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (QCOM: +382. 4%, INTC: +350. 5%), 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.
10What are the main differences between ALMU and NVDA and INTC and QCOM and MRVL?
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: ALMU is a small-cap high-growth stock; NVDA is a mega-cap high-growth stock; INTC is a large-cap quality compounder stock; QCOM is a large-cap quality compounder stock; MRVL is a mid-cap high-growth stock. QCOM pays a dividend while ALMU, NVDA, INTC, MRVL do 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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.