Internet Content & Information
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
BZFD vs NFLX vs GOOGL vs FUBO vs META
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Entertainment
Internet Content & Information
Broadcasting
Internet Content & Information
BZFD vs NFLX vs GOOGL vs FUBO vs META — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Internet Content & Information | Entertainment | Internet Content & Information | Broadcasting | Internet Content & Information |
| Market Cap | $30M | $374.00B | $4.81T | $317M | $1.56T |
| Revenue (TTM) | $185M | $45.18B | $422.57B | $2.72B | $214.96B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-58M | $10.98B | $160.21B | $156M | $70.59B |
| Gross Margin | 40.5% | 48.5% | 60.4% | 11.1% | 81.9% |
| Operating Margin | -25.8% | 29.5% | 32.7% | -2.6% | 41.2% |
| Forward P/E | — | 24.8x | 29.6x | — | 20.4x |
| Total Debt | $86M | $14.46B | $59.29B | $670M | $83.90B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $8M | $9.03B | $30.71B | $452M | $35.87B |
BZFD vs NFLX vs GOOGL vs FUBO vs META — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Mar 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| BuzzFeed, Inc. (BZFD) | 100 | 2.1 | -97.9% |
| Netflix, Inc. (NFLX) | 100 | 169.2 | +69.2% |
| Alphabet Inc. (GOOGL) | 100 | 385.9 | +285.9% |
| fuboTV Inc. (FUBO) | 100 | 4.1 | -95.9% |
| Meta Platforms, Inc. (META) | 100 | 209.4 | +109.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: BZFD vs NFLX vs GOOGL vs FUBO vs META
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, BZFD doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
NFLX ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.75 vs META's 1.11
- Beta 0.39 vs BZFD's 2.48, lower leverage
GOOGL carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 1.26, yield 0.2%
- 10.0% 10Y total return vs NFLX's 8.8%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.26, Low D/E 14.3%, current ratio 2.01x
- 37.9% margin vs BZFD's -31.2%
FUBO is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 67.7%, EPS growth 96.3%, 3Y rev CAGR 39.2%
- 67.7% revenue growth vs BZFD's -2.4%
META is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if defensive is your priority.
- Beta 1.59, yield 0.3%, current ratio 2.60x
- Better valuation composite
- 0.3% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs GOOGL's 0.2%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 67.7% revenue growth vs BZFD's -2.4% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 37.9% margin vs BZFD's -31.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.39 vs BZFD's 2.48, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 0.3% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs GOOGL's 0.2%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +163.5% vs FUBO's -65.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 27.4% ROA vs BZFD's -28.4%, ROIC 25.1% vs -27.8% |
BZFD vs NFLX vs GOOGL vs FUBO vs META — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
BZFD vs NFLX vs GOOGL vs FUBO vs META — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
META leads in 2 of 6 categories
FUBO leads 1 • GOOGL leads 1 • BZFD leads 0 • NFLX leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
META leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
GOOGL is the larger business by revenue, generating $422.6B annually — 2280.9x BZFD's $185M. GOOGL is the more profitable business, keeping 37.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BZFD's -31.2%. On growth, FUBO holds the edge at +2.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $185M | $45.2B | $422.6B | $2.7B | $215.0B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$32M | $30.1B | $161.3B | -$14M | $109.3B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$58M | $11.0B | $160.2B | $156M | $70.6B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$12M | $9.5B | $73.3B | -$81M | $48.3B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +40.5% | +48.5% | +60.4% | +11.1% | +81.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -25.8% | +29.5% | +32.7% | -2.6% | +41.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -31.2% | +24.3% | +37.9% | +5.7% | +32.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -6.2% | +20.9% | +17.3% | -3.0% | +22.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +66.9% | +17.6% | +21.8% | +2.5% | +33.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -6.2% | +31.1% | +81.9% | +81.8% | +62.4% |
Valuation Metrics
FUBO leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 26.3x trailing earnings, META trades at a 29% valuation discount to GOOGL's 36.8x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), NFLX offers better value at 1.06x vs META's 1.43x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $30M | $374.0B | $4.81T | $317M | $1.56T |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $108M | $379.4B | $4.84T | $534M | $1.61T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.53x | 34.89x | 36.82x | -44.88x | 26.26x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 24.80x | 29.61x | — | 20.36x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.06x | 1.23x | — | 1.43x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 12.61x | 32.22x | — | 15.81x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.16x | 8.28x | 11.95x | 0.12x | 7.78x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.62x | 14.32x | 11.72x | 0.12x | 7.31x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 39.53x | 65.72x | — | 33.90x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — NFLX and GOOGL each lead in 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
NFLX delivers a 41.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $41 in annual profit, vs $-75 for BZFD. GOOGL carries lower financial leverage with a 0.14x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to BZFD's 1.71x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), NFLX scores 7/9 vs BZFD's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -75.2% | +41.3% | +39.0% | +16.2% | +33.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -28.4% | +19.8% | +27.4% | +8.1% | +20.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -27.8% | +29.8% | +25.1% | -3.3% | +27.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -44.0% | +30.5% | +30.3% | -4.1% | +29.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 7 | 7 | 4 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.71x | 0.54x | 0.14x | 0.25x | 0.39x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $77M | $5.4B | $28.6B | $218M | $48.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $8M | $9.0B | $30.7B | $452M | $35.9B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $86M | $14.5B | $59.3B | $670M | $83.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -10.78x | 17.33x | 392.15x | 10.35x | 78.84x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
GOOGL leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in GOOGL five years ago would be worth $33,982 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $208 for BZFD. Over the past 12 months, GOOGL leads with a +163.5% total return vs FUBO's -65.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors GOOGL at 54.8% vs BZFD's -29.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -15.4% | -3.0% | +26.4% | -65.3% | -5.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -56.6% | -23.6% | +163.5% | -65.6% | +3.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -64.5% | +166.5% | +270.8% | -51.7% | +166.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -97.9% | +75.2% | +239.8% | -94.8% | +94.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -97.9% | +875.3% | +996.1% | -90.3% | +421.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -29.2% | +38.6% | +54.8% | -21.6% | +38.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — NFLX and GOOGL each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
NFLX is the less volatile stock with a 0.39 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than BZFD's 2.48 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. GOOGL currently trades 99.5% from its 52-week high vs FUBO's 19.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.48x | 0.39x | 1.26x | 1.77x | 1.59x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $2.68 | $134.12 | $400.10 | $56.64 | $796.25 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.54 | $75.01 | $147.84 | $2.48 | $520.26 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +30.4% | +65.8% | +99.5% | +19.0% | +77.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 69.6 | 35.3 | 83.4 | 38.0 | 42.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 232K | 44.0M | 28.3M | 1.9M | 15.6M |
Analyst Outlook
META leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NFLX as "Buy", GOOGL as "Buy", FUBO as "Hold", META as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 299.3% upside for FUBO (target: $43) vs 2.1% for GOOGL (target: $406). For income investors, META offers the higher dividend yield at 0.34% vs GOOGL's 0.21%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $116.29 | $406.28 | $43.00 | $821.80 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 99 | 82 | 14 | 60 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +0.2% | — | +0.3% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 2 | — | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $0.82 | — | $2.07 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +2.4% | +0.9% | 0.0% | +1.7% |
META leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Analyst Outlook). FUBO leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
BZFD vs NFLX vs GOOGL vs FUBO vs META: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is BZFD or NFLX or GOOGL or FUBO or META a better buy right now?
For growth investors, fuboTV Inc.
(FUBO) is the stronger pick with 67. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -2. 4% for BuzzFeed, Inc. (BZFD). Meta Platforms, Inc. (META) offers the better valuation at 26. 3x trailing P/E (20. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Netflix, Inc. (NFLX) a "Buy" — based on 99 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 — BZFD or NFLX or GOOGL or FUBO or META?
On trailing P/E, Meta Platforms, Inc.
(META) is the cheapest at 26. 3x versus Alphabet Inc. at 36. 8x. On forward P/E, Meta Platforms, Inc. is actually cheaper at 20. 4x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Netflix, Inc. wins at 0. 75x versus Meta Platforms, Inc. 's 1. 11x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — BZFD or NFLX or GOOGL or FUBO or META?
Over the past 5 years, Alphabet Inc.
(GOOGL) delivered a total return of +239. 8%, compared to -97. 9% for BuzzFeed, Inc. (BZFD). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GOOGL returned +996. 1% versus BZFD's -97. 9%. 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 — BZFD or NFLX or GOOGL or FUBO or META?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Netflix, Inc.
(NFLX) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 39β versus BuzzFeed, Inc. 's 2. 48β — meaning BZFD is approximately 538% more volatile than NFLX relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Alphabet Inc. (GOOGL) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 14% versus 171% for BuzzFeed, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — BZFD or NFLX or GOOGL or FUBO or META?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), fuboTV Inc.
(FUBO) is pulling ahead at 67. 7% versus -2. 4% for BuzzFeed, Inc. (BZFD). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: fuboTV Inc. grew EPS 96. 3% year-over-year, compared to -68. 1% for BuzzFeed, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, FUBO leads at 39. 2% 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 — BZFD or NFLX or GOOGL or FUBO or META?
Alphabet Inc.
(GOOGL) is the more profitable company, earning 32. 8% net margin versus -31. 2% for BuzzFeed, Inc. — meaning it keeps 32. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: META leads at 41. 4% versus -25. 8% for BZFD. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — META leads at 82. 0%, 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 BZFD or NFLX or GOOGL or FUBO or META 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, Netflix, Inc. (NFLX) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 75x versus Meta Platforms, Inc. 's 1. 11x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Meta Platforms, Inc. (META) trades at 20. 4x forward P/E versus 29. 6x for Alphabet Inc. — 9. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FUBO: 299. 3% to $43. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — BZFD or NFLX or GOOGL or FUBO or META?
In this comparison, META (0.
3% yield), GOOGL (0. 2% yield) pay a dividend. BZFD, NFLX, FUBO do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is BZFD or NFLX or GOOGL or FUBO or META better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Netflix, Inc.
(NFLX) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 39), +875. 3% 10Y return). BuzzFeed, Inc. (BZFD) carries a higher beta of 2. 48 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (NFLX: +875. 3%, BZFD: -97. 9%), 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 BZFD and NFLX and GOOGL and FUBO and META?
Both stocks operate in the Communication Services sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: BZFD is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NFLX is a large-cap high-growth stock; GOOGL is a mega-cap high-growth stock; FUBO is a small-cap high-growth stock; META is a mega-cap high-growth 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.
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.
- Sector: Communication Services
- Market Cap > $100B
- Revenue Growth > 33%
- Gross Margin > 24%
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.