Auto - Manufacturers
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CENN vs AMZN vs MSFT vs XOS vs AAPL
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Specialty Retail
Software - Infrastructure
Agricultural - Machinery
Consumer Electronics
CENN vs AMZN vs MSFT vs XOS vs AAPL — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Auto - Manufacturers | Specialty Retail | Software - Infrastructure | Agricultural - Machinery | Consumer Electronics |
| Market Cap | $3M | $2.92T | $3.13T | $15M | $4.22T |
| Revenue (TTM) | $18M | $742.78B | $318.27B | $52M | $451.44B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-73M | $90.80B | $125.22B | $-35M | $122.58B |
| Gross Margin | -12.8% | 50.6% | 68.3% | 3.1% | 47.9% |
| Operating Margin | -180.0% | 11.5% | 46.8% | -72.6% | 32.6% |
| Forward P/E | — | 34.8x | 25.3x | — | 33.8x |
| Total Debt | $11M | $152.99B | $112.18B | $43M | $112.38B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $4M | $86.81B | $30.24B | $11M | $35.93B |
CENN vs AMZN vs MSFT vs XOS vs AAPL — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Dec 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cenntro Electric Gr… (CENN) | 100 | 0.2 | -99.8% |
| Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) | 100 | 166.5 | +66.5% |
| Microsoft Corporati… (MSFT) | 100 | 189.2 | +89.2% |
| Xos, Inc. (XOS) | 100 | 0.6 | -99.4% |
| Apple Inc. (AAPL) | 100 | 216.6 | +116.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CENN vs AMZN vs MSFT vs XOS vs AAPL
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, CENN doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
AMZN ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 1.24 vs AAPL's 1.89
- Better valuation composite
MSFT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 19 yrs, beta 0.89, yield 0.8%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.89, Low D/E 32.7%, current ratio 1.35x
- Beta 0.89, yield 0.8%, current ratio 1.35x
- 39.3% margin vs CENN's -403.7%
XOS is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 25.7%, EPS growth 49.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 123.0%
- 25.7% revenue growth vs CENN's -42.2%
AAPL is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 11.7% 10Y total return vs MSFT's 7.9%
- +47.0% vs CENN's -92.3%
- 34.0% ROA vs CENN's -66.2%, ROIC 67.4% vs -36.2%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 25.7% revenue growth vs CENN's -42.2% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 39.3% margin vs CENN's -403.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.89 vs CENN's 1.92 | |
| Dividends | 0.8% yield, 19-year raise streak, vs AAPL's 0.4%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +47.0% vs CENN's -92.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 34.0% ROA vs CENN's -66.2%, ROIC 67.4% vs -36.2% |
CENN vs AMZN vs MSFT vs XOS vs AAPL — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CENN vs AMZN vs MSFT vs XOS vs AAPL — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MSFT leads in 2 of 6 categories
AAPL leads 1 • CENN leads 0 • AMZN leads 0 • XOS leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MSFT leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AMZN is the larger business by revenue, generating $742.8B annually — 41082.4x CENN's $18M. MSFT is the more profitable business, keeping 39.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CENN's -4.0%. On growth, CENN holds the edge at +73.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $18M | $742.8B | $318.3B | $52M | $451.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$33M | $155.9B | $192.6B | -$34M | $160.0B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$73M | $90.8B | $125.2B | -$35M | $122.6B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$13M | -$2.5B | $72.9B | $6M | $129.2B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -12.8% | +50.6% | +68.3% | +3.1% | +47.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -180.0% | +11.5% | +46.8% | -72.6% | +32.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -4.0% | +12.2% | +39.3% | -66.1% | +27.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -73.9% | -0.3% | +22.9% | +12.0% | +28.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +73.8% | +16.6% | +18.3% | +4.5% | +16.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -56.4% | +74.8% | +23.4% | +116.7% | +21.8% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — CENN and MSFT each lead in 2 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 30.9x trailing earnings, MSFT trades at a 20% valuation discount to AAPL's 38.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), AMZN offers better value at 1.35x vs AAPL's 2.16x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $3M | $2.92T | $3.13T | $15M | $4.22T |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $10M | $2.98T | $3.21T | $47M | $4.30T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.05x | 37.82x | 30.86x | -0.28x | 38.53x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 34.77x | 25.34x | — | 33.78x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.35x | 1.64x | — | 2.16x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 20.47x | 19.72x | — | 29.68x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.19x | 4.07x | 11.10x | 0.27x | 10.14x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.08x | 7.14x | 9.15x | 0.41x | 58.49x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 378.98x | 43.66x | — | 42.72x |
Profitability & Efficiency
AAPL leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
AAPL delivers a 146.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $147 in annual profit, vs $-111 for XOS. CENN carries lower financial leverage with a 0.28x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to AAPL's 1.52x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), AAPL scores 8/9 vs CENN's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -108.2% | +23.3% | +33.1% | -111.2% | +146.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -66.2% | +11.5% | +19.2% | -46.8% | +34.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -36.2% | +14.7% | +24.9% | -53.1% | +67.4% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -43.0% | +15.3% | +29.7% | -72.9% | +69.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.28x | 0.37x | 0.33x | 1.28x | 1.52x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $7M | $66.2B | $81.9B | $32M | $76.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $4M | $86.8B | $30.2B | $11M | $35.9B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $11M | $153.0B | $112.2B | $43M | $112.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -73.88x | 39.96x | 55.65x | -19.14x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — AMZN and AAPL each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in AAPL five years ago would be worth $22,442 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8 for CENN. Over the past 12 months, AAPL leads with a +47.0% total return vs CENN's -92.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors AMZN at 36.8% vs CENN's -74.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -55.4% | +19.7% | -10.8% | -6.1% | +6.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -92.3% | +43.7% | -2.1% | -50.1% | +47.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.3% | +156.2% | +39.5% | -87.4% | +67.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.9% | +64.8% | +72.5% | -99.4% | +124.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | +697.8% | +787.7% | -99.4% | +1174.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -74.4% | +36.8% | +11.7% | -49.8% | +18.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MSFT and AAPL each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MSFT is the less volatile stock with a 0.89 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CENN's 1.92 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. AAPL currently trades 98.4% from its 52-week high vs CENN's 6.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.92x | 1.51x | 0.89x | 1.51x | 0.99x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $66.00 | $278.56 | $555.45 | $5.60 | $292.13 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.15 | $185.01 | $356.28 | $1.60 | $193.25 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +6.1% | +97.3% | +75.8% | +33.0% | +98.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 38.8 | 81.1 | 54.0 | 57.3 | 69.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 32K | 45.5M | 32.5M | 25K | 39.8M |
Analyst Outlook
MSFT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: AMZN as "Buy", MSFT as "Buy", AAPL as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 31.1% upside for MSFT (target: $552) vs 10.3% for AAPL (target: $317). For income investors, MSFT offers the higher dividend yield at 0.77% vs AAPL's 0.36%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | — | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $306.77 | $551.75 | — | $317.11 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 94 | 81 | — | 110 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +0.8% | — | +0.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 19 | — | 14 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $3.23 | — | $1.03 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.6% | 0.0% | +2.1% |
MSFT leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Analyst Outlook). AAPL leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
CENN vs AMZN vs MSFT vs XOS vs AAPL: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CENN or AMZN or MSFT or XOS or AAPL a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Xos, Inc.
(XOS) is the stronger pick with 25. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -42. 2% for Cenntro Electric Group Limited (CENN). Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) offers the better valuation at 30. 9x trailing P/E (25. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Amazon. com, Inc. (AMZN) a "Buy" — based on 94 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 — CENN or AMZN or MSFT or XOS or AAPL?
On trailing P/E, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the cheapest at 30.
9x versus Apple Inc. at 38. 5x. On forward P/E, Microsoft Corporation is actually cheaper at 25. 3x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Amazon. com, Inc. wins at 1. 24x versus Apple Inc. 's 1. 89x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CENN or AMZN or MSFT or XOS or AAPL?
Over the past 5 years, Apple Inc.
(AAPL) delivered a total return of +124. 4%, compared to -99. 9% for Cenntro Electric Group Limited (CENN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AAPL returned +1174% versus CENN's -100. 0%. 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 — CENN or AMZN or MSFT or XOS or AAPL?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
89β versus Cenntro Electric Group Limited's 1. 92β — meaning CENN is approximately 116% more volatile than MSFT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Cenntro Electric Group Limited (CENN) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 28% versus 152% for Apple Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CENN or AMZN or MSFT or XOS or AAPL?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Xos, Inc.
(XOS) is pulling ahead at 25. 7% versus -42. 2% for Cenntro Electric Group Limited (CENN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Xos, Inc. grew EPS 49. 0% year-over-year, compared to -0. 2% for Cenntro Electric Group Limited. Over a 3-year CAGR, XOS leads at 123. 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 — CENN or AMZN or MSFT or XOS or AAPL?
Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the more profitable company, earning 36.
1% net margin versus -403. 7% for Cenntro Electric Group Limited — meaning it keeps 36. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MSFT leads at 45. 6% versus -180. 0% for CENN. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MSFT leads at 68. 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 CENN or AMZN or MSFT or XOS or AAPL 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, Amazon. com, Inc. (AMZN) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 24x versus Apple Inc. 's 1. 89x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) trades at 25. 3x forward P/E versus 34. 8x for Amazon. com, Inc. — 9. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MSFT: 31. 1% to $551. 75.
08Which pays a better dividend — CENN or AMZN or MSFT or XOS or AAPL?
In this comparison, MSFT (0.
8% yield), AAPL (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. CENN, AMZN, XOS do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CENN or AMZN or MSFT or XOS or AAPL better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
89), 0. 8% yield, +787. 7% 10Y return). Cenntro Electric Group Limited (CENN) carries a higher beta of 1. 92 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (MSFT: +787. 7%, CENN: -100. 0%), 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 CENN and AMZN and MSFT and XOS and AAPL?
These companies operate in different sectors (CENN (Consumer Cyclical) and AMZN (Consumer Cyclical) and MSFT (Technology) and XOS (Industrials) and AAPL (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: CENN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; AMZN is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; MSFT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; XOS is a small-cap high-growth stock; AAPL is a mega-cap quality compounder stock. MSFT pays a dividend while CENN, AMZN, XOS, AAPL 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.