CBOE vs MS

For growth investors, Morgan Stanley (MS) is the stronger pick with 16.

8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 15. 1% for Cboe Global Markets, Inc. (CBOE). Morgan Stanley (MS) offers the better valuation at 24. 3x trailing P/E (16. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Morgan Stanley (MS) a "Buy" — based on 52 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, Morgan Stanley (MS) is the cheapest at 24.

3x versus Cboe Global Markets, Inc. at 33. 1x. On forward P/E, Morgan Stanley is actually cheaper at 16. 3x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Cboe Global Markets, Inc. wins at 1. 41x versus Morgan Stanley's 1. 83x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.

Over the past 5 years, Cboe Global Markets, Inc.

(CBOE) delivered a total return of +231. 6%, compared to +142. 2% for Morgan Stanley (MS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MS returned +739. 4% versus CBOE's +473. 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), Cboe Global Markets, Inc.

(CBOE) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 27β versus Morgan Stanley's 1. 37β — meaning MS is approximately -605% more volatile than CBOE relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Cboe Global Markets, Inc. (CBOE) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 33% versus 3% for Morgan Stanley — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Morgan Stanley (MS) is pulling ahead at 16.

8% versus 15. 1% for Cboe Global Markets, Inc. (CBOE). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Morgan Stanley grew EPS 53. 5% year-over-year, compared to 44. 5% for Cboe Global Markets, Inc.. 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.

Cboe Global Markets, Inc.

(CBOE) is the more profitable company, earning 23. 3% net margin versus 13. 0% for Morgan Stanley — meaning it keeps 23. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CBOE leads at 32. 1% versus 17. 1% for MS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MS leads at 55. 6%, 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, Cboe Global Markets, Inc. (CBOE) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 41x versus Morgan Stanley's 1. 83x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Morgan Stanley (MS) trades at 16. 3x forward P/E versus 27. 5x for Cboe Global Markets, Inc. — 11. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MS: 6. 5% to $205. 75.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Morgan Stanley (MS) offers the highest yield at 2. 0%, versus 0. 8% for Cboe Global Markets, Inc. (CBOE).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Cboe Global Markets, Inc.

(CBOE) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 27), 0. 8% yield, +473. 5% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CBOE: +473. 5%, MS: +739. 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 Financial Services sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

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.