Telecommunications Services
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CCOI vs VZ vs T vs LUMN vs TMUS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Telecommunications Services
Telecommunications Services
Telecommunications Services
Telecommunications Services
CCOI vs VZ vs T vs LUMN vs TMUS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Telecommunications Services | Telecommunications Services | Telecommunications Services | Telecommunications Services | Telecommunications Services |
| Market Cap | $817M | $198.61B | $176.40B | $8.71B | $210.16B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $949M | $138.19B | $126.52B | $12.12B | $90.53B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-170M | $17.17B | $21.41B | $-1.74B | $10.54B |
| Gross Margin | 32.4% | 55.7% | 79.7% | 35.2% | 54.3% |
| Operating Margin | -7.9% | 21.2% | 19.4% | -2.6% | 20.4% |
| Forward P/E | — | 9.5x | 10.9x | — | 18.5x |
| Total Debt | $2.93B | $200.59B | $173.99B | $17.71B | $122.27B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $205M | $19.05B | $18.23B | $1.00B | $5.60B |
CCOI vs VZ vs T vs LUMN vs TMUS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cogent Communicatio… (CCOI) | 100 | 21.3 | -78.7% |
| Verizon Communicati… (VZ) | 100 | 82.1 | -17.9% |
| AT&T Inc. (T) | 100 | 108.5 | +8.5% |
| Lumen Technologies,… (LUMN) | 100 | 86.1 | -13.9% |
| T-Mobile US, Inc. (TMUS) | 100 | 194.1 | +94.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CCOI vs VZ vs T vs LUMN vs TMUS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CCOI has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 1.67, yield 19.2%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.67, current ratio 2.04x
- Beta 1.67, yield 19.2%, current ratio 2.04x
- Beta 1.67 vs LUMN's 2.74
VZ ranks third and is worth considering specifically for value.
- Lower P/E (9.5x vs 18.5x)
T is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if quality and efficiency is your priority.
- 16.9% margin vs CCOI's -17.9%
- 5.1% ROA vs CCOI's -5.4%, ROIC 6.7% vs -3.1%
LUMN is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +100.0% vs CCOI's -65.4%
TMUS is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 8.5%, EPS growth 0.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 3.5%
- 407.2% 10Y total return vs T's 41.9%
- 8.5% revenue growth vs CCOI's -5.8%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 8.5% revenue growth vs CCOI's -5.8% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (9.5x vs 18.5x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 16.9% margin vs CCOI's -17.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.67 vs LUMN's 2.74 | |
| Dividends | 19.2% yield, vs VZ's 5.8% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +100.0% vs CCOI's -65.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 5.1% ROA vs CCOI's -5.4%, ROIC 6.7% vs -3.1% |
CCOI vs VZ vs T vs LUMN vs TMUS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CCOI vs VZ vs T vs LUMN vs TMUS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
T leads in 2 of 6 categories
TMUS leads 1 • LUMN leads 1 • CCOI leads 0 • VZ leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
T leads this category, winning 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
VZ is the larger business by revenue, generating $138.2B annually — 145.7x CCOI's $949M. T is the more profitable business, keeping 16.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CCOI's -17.9%. On growth, TMUS holds the edge at +10.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $949M | $138.2B | $126.5B | $12.1B | $90.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $174M | $47.6B | $45.1B | $2.4B | $29.9B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$170M | $17.2B | $21.4B | -$1.7B | $10.5B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$208M | $19.8B | $10.6B | $5.4B | $10.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +32.4% | +55.7% | +79.7% | +35.2% | +54.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -7.9% | +21.2% | +19.4% | -2.6% | +20.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -17.9% | +12.4% | +16.9% | -14.3% | +11.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -21.9% | +14.3% | +8.4% | +44.9% | +11.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -3.2% | +2.0% | +2.9% | -8.9% | +10.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +23.9% | -53.4% | -11.5% | 0.0% | -12.0% |
Valuation Metrics
T leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 8.3x trailing earnings, T trades at a 58% valuation discount to TMUS's 20.0x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, T's 7.4x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than CCOI's 21.3x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $817M | $198.6B | $176.4B | $8.7B | $210.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $3.5B | $380.2B | $332.2B | $25.4B | $326.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -4.29x | 11.60x | 8.31x | -4.83x | 19.98x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 9.52x | 10.93x | — | 18.45x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | 0.67x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 21.30x | 7.99x | 7.37x | 9.91x | 10.13x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.84x | 1.44x | 1.40x | 0.70x | 2.38x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 1.88x | 1.41x | — | 3.71x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 9.87x | 9.07x | 23.49x | 20.32x |
Profitability & Efficiency
TMUS leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
TMUS delivers a 17.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $18 in annual profit, vs $-2 for CCOI. T carries lower financial leverage with a 1.35x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to TMUS's 2.07x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), T scores 7/9 vs CCOI's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -2.3% | +16.4% | +16.8% | -79.4% | +17.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -5.4% | +4.4% | +5.1% | -5.3% | +4.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -3.1% | +8.0% | +6.7% | -0.8% | +8.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -3.6% | +8.8% | +6.8% | -0.6% | +9.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 4 | 7 | 4 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 1.90x | 1.35x | — | 2.07x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $2.7B | $181.5B | $155.8B | $16.7B | $116.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $205M | $19.0B | $18.2B | $1.0B | $5.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $2.9B | $200.6B | $174.0B | $17.7B | $122.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -0.52x | 4.39x | 4.97x | -1.12x | 5.33x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LUMN leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in TMUS five years ago would be worth $14,546 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $4,236 for CCOI. Over the past 12 months, LUMN leads with a +100.0% total return vs CCOI's -65.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors LUMN at 54.4% vs CCOI's -26.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -20.8% | +19.7% | +5.1% | +10.0% | -2.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -65.4% | +13.6% | -6.2% | +100.0% | -21.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -60.0% | +45.9% | +67.0% | +267.8% | +40.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -57.6% | +2.8% | +29.9% | -28.8% | +45.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +13.1% | +41.6% | +41.9% | -35.7% | +407.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -26.3% | +13.4% | +18.6% | +54.4% | +12.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — VZ and TMUS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
TMUS is the less volatile stock with a -0.28 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LUMN's 2.74 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. VZ currently trades 91.1% from its 52-week high vs CCOI's 29.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.67x | -0.11x | -0.26x | 2.74x | -0.28x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $55.24 | $51.68 | $29.79 | $11.95 | $261.56 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $14.82 | $10.60 | $22.95 | $3.37 | $181.36 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +29.5% | +91.1% | +84.8% | +70.8% | +74.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 34.3 | 49.3 | 38.9 | 73.4 | 45.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.2M | 24.3M | 33.7M | 12.5M | 5.6M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — CCOI and VZ each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CCOI as "Hold", VZ as "Hold", T as "Hold", LUMN as "Hold", TMUS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 68.5% upside for CCOI (target: $28) vs -16.3% for LUMN (target: $7). For income investors, CCOI offers the higher dividend yield at 19.18% vs TMUS's 1.88%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $27.50 | $51.56 | $29.42 | $7.08 | $254.08 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 32 | 60 | 62 | 28 | 54 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +19.2% | +5.8% | +4.5% | +0.0% | +1.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 11 | 2 | 0 | 3 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $3.13 | $2.71 | $1.14 | $0.00 | $3.64 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +2.0% | 0.0% | +2.6% | 0.0% | +4.7% |
T leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). TMUS leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 2 tied.
CCOI vs VZ vs T vs LUMN vs TMUS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CCOI or VZ or T or LUMN or TMUS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, T-Mobile US, Inc.
(TMUS) is the stronger pick with 8. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -5. 8% for Cogent Communications Holdings, Inc. (CCOI). AT&T Inc. (T) offers the better valuation at 8. 3x trailing P/E (10. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate T-Mobile US, Inc. (TMUS) a "Buy" — based on 54 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 — CCOI or VZ or T or LUMN or TMUS?
On trailing P/E, AT&T Inc.
(T) is the cheapest at 8. 3x versus T-Mobile US, Inc. at 20. 0x. On forward P/E, Verizon Communications Inc. is actually cheaper at 9. 5x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CCOI or VZ or T or LUMN or TMUS?
Over the past 5 years, T-Mobile US, Inc.
(TMUS) delivered a total return of +45. 5%, compared to -57. 6% for Cogent Communications Holdings, Inc. (CCOI). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: TMUS returned +407. 2% versus LUMN's -35. 7%. 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 — CCOI or VZ or T or LUMN or TMUS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), T-Mobile US, Inc.
(TMUS) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 28β versus Lumen Technologies, Inc. 's 2. 74β — meaning LUMN is approximately -1078% more volatile than TMUS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, AT&T Inc. (T) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 135% versus 2% for T-Mobile US, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CCOI or VZ or T or LUMN or TMUS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), T-Mobile US, Inc.
(TMUS) is pulling ahead at 8. 5% versus -5. 8% for Cogent Communications Holdings, Inc. (CCOI). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: AT&T Inc. grew EPS 104. 0% year-over-year, compared to -30. 4% for Lumen Technologies, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CCOI leads at 17. 6% 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 — CCOI or VZ or T or LUMN or TMUS?
AT&T Inc.
(T) is the more profitable company, earning 17. 4% net margin versus -18. 7% for Cogent Communications Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 17. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: TMUS leads at 21. 2% versus -10. 6% for CCOI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — T leads at 79. 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.
07Is CCOI or VZ or T or LUMN or TMUS more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Verizon Communications Inc.
(VZ) trades at 9. 5x forward P/E versus 18. 5x for T-Mobile US, Inc. — 8. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CCOI: 68. 5% to $27. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — CCOI or VZ or T or LUMN or TMUS?
In this comparison, CCOI (19.
2% yield), VZ (5. 8% yield), T (4. 5% yield), TMUS (1. 9% yield) pay a dividend. LUMN does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CCOI or VZ or T or LUMN or TMUS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, T-Mobile US, Inc.
(TMUS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 28), 1. 9% yield, +407. 2% 10Y return). Lumen Technologies, Inc. (LUMN) carries a higher beta of 2. 74 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (TMUS: +407. 2%, LUMN: -35. 7%), 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 CCOI and VZ and T and LUMN and TMUS?
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: CCOI is a small-cap income-oriented stock; VZ is a mid-cap deep-value stock; T is a mid-cap deep-value stock; LUMN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; TMUS is a large-cap quality compounder stock. CCOI, VZ, T, TMUS pay a dividend while LUMN 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.
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
- Gross Margin > 19%
- Dividend Yield > 7.6%
- Sector: Communication Services
- Market Cap > $100B
- Net Margin > 10%
- Dividend Yield > 1.8%
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.