Semiconductors
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CEVA vs RMBS vs IDCC vs SIMO vs QUIK
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Semiconductors
Software - Application
Semiconductors
Semiconductors
CEVA vs RMBS vs IDCC vs SIMO vs QUIK — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Semiconductors | Semiconductors | Software - Application | Semiconductors | Semiconductors |
| Market Cap | $810M | $13.69B | $7.18B | $2.04B | $294M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $108M | $721M | $829M | $886M | $16M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-11M | $230M | $366M | $123M | $-9M |
| Gross Margin | 87.2% | 77.0% | 83.4% | 48.3% | 36.7% |
| Operating Margin | -10.1% | 35.9% | 49.6% | 10.5% | -55.0% |
| Forward P/E | 67.3x | 42.9x | 38.8x | 29.9x | — |
| Total Debt | $6M | $44M | $506M | $0.00 | $22M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $18M | $183M | $739M | $202M | $22M |
CEVA vs RMBS vs IDCC vs SIMO vs QUIK — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| CEVA, Inc. (CEVA) | 100 | 97.8 | -2.2% |
| Rambus Inc. (RMBS) | 100 | 814.7 | +714.7% |
| InterDigital, Inc. (IDCC) | 100 | 507.1 | +407.1% |
| Silicon Motion Tech… (SIMO) | 100 | 538.5 | +438.5% |
| QuickLogic Corporat… (QUIK) | 100 | 356.9 | +256.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CEVA vs RMBS vs IDCC vs SIMO vs QUIK
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CEVA lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
RMBS ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 27.1%, EPS growth 27.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 15.9%
- 10.1% 10Y total return vs SIMO's 5.3%
- 27.1% revenue growth vs QUIK's -5.1%
IDCC carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 4 yrs, beta 1.12, yield 0.6%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.12, Low D/E 45.9%, current ratio 1.84x
- 44.2% margin vs QUIK's -58.3%
- Beta 1.12 vs RMBS's 3.00
SIMO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if valuation efficiency and defensive is your priority.
- PEG 0.66 vs IDCC's 0.74
- Beta 1.90, yield 3.3%, current ratio 2.79x
- Better valuation composite
- 3.3% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs IDCC's 0.6%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
Among these 5 stocks, QUIK doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 27.1% revenue growth vs QUIK's -5.1% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 44.2% margin vs QUIK's -58.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.12 vs RMBS's 3.00 | |
| Dividends | 3.3% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs IDCC's 0.6%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +359.6% vs IDCC's +32.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 17.7% ROA vs QUIK's -18.6%, ROIC 40.9% vs -13.0% |
CEVA vs RMBS vs IDCC vs SIMO vs QUIK — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CEVA vs RMBS vs IDCC vs SIMO vs QUIK — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
IDCC leads in 2 of 6 categories
SIMO leads 2 • CEVA leads 0 • RMBS leads 0 • QUIK leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
IDCC leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SIMO is the larger business by revenue, generating $886M annually — 56.2x QUIK's $16M. IDCC is the more profitable business, keeping 44.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to QUIK's -58.3%. On growth, SIMO holds the edge at +45.7% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $108M | $721M | $829M | $886M | $16M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$7M | $288M | $489M | $123M | -$4M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$11M | $230M | $366M | $123M | -$9M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$6M | $335M | $580M | $6M | -$7M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +87.2% | +77.0% | +83.4% | +48.3% | +36.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -10.1% | +35.9% | +49.6% | +10.5% | -55.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -10.5% | +31.9% | +44.2% | +13.8% | -58.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -6.0% | +46.5% | +70.0% | +0.7% | -46.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +4.3% | +8.1% | -2.4% | +45.7% | -52.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -2.0% | -1.8% | -38.0% | +7.4% | -71.4% |
Valuation Metrics
SIMO leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 16.6x trailing earnings, SIMO trades at a 72% valuation discount to RMBS's 60.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), SIMO offers better value at 0.37x vs IDCC's 0.45x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $810M | $13.7B | $7.2B | $2.0B | $294M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $797M | $13.6B | $6.9B | $1.8B | $294M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -91.14x | 60.00x | 23.62x | 16.62x | -67.54x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 67.35x | 42.88x | 38.81x | 29.86x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.45x | 0.37x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 46.57x | 12.91x | 14.90x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 7.57x | 19.35x | 8.61x | 2.30x | 14.64x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.99x | 10.18x | 8.73x | 2.45x | 10.24x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 1569.47x | 41.10x | 13.58x | 324.67x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
IDCC leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
IDCC delivers a 33.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $33 in annual profit, vs $-35 for QUIK. CEVA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.02x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to QUIK's 0.88x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CEVA scores 6/9 vs QUIK's 3/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -4.2% | +17.4% | +33.4% | +15.2% | -35.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -3.7% | +15.5% | +17.7% | +11.2% | -18.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -2.3% | +17.1% | +40.9% | +12.4% | -13.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -2.7% | +19.5% | +38.1% | +10.8% | -15.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 3 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.02x | 0.03x | 0.46x | — | 0.88x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$13M | -$139M | -$233M | -$202M | -$19,000 |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $18M | $183M | $739M | $202M | $22M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $6M | $44M | $506M | $0 | $22M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 217.32x | 11.48x | — | -21.26x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
SIMO leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in RMBS five years ago would be worth $65,393 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,465 for CEVA. Over the past 12 months, SIMO leads with a +359.6% total return vs IDCC's +32.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors SIMO at 60.3% vs CEVA's 9.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +50.4% | +27.5% | -14.1% | +159.9% | +179.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +59.5% | +148.9% | +32.4% | +359.6% | +210.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +31.6% | +161.1% | +251.7% | +311.9% | +217.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -35.4% | +553.9% | +303.1% | +267.4% | +182.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +27.2% | +1011.5% | +436.7% | +533.8% | +25.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +9.6% | +37.7% | +52.1% | +60.3% | +46.9% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CEVA and IDCC each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
IDCC is the less volatile stock with a 1.12 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than RMBS's 3.00 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CEVA currently trades 96.7% from its 52-week high vs IDCC's 67.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.76x | 3.00x | 1.12x | 1.90x | 2.36x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $34.87 | $161.80 | $412.60 | $251.71 | $18.98 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $17.02 | $49.61 | $205.78 | $52.01 | $4.80 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +96.7% | +78.2% | +67.6% | +96.4% | +92.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 78.9 | 58.3 | 30.8 | 85.8 | 77.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 498K | 2.2M | 393K | 743K | 344K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — IDCC and SIMO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CEVA as "Buy", RMBS as "Buy", IDCC as "Buy", SIMO as "Buy", QUIK as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 52.5% upside for IDCC (target: $425) vs -43.1% for QUIK (target: $10). For income investors, SIMO offers the higher dividend yield at 3.30% vs IDCC's 0.63%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $29.33 | $135.67 | $425.00 | $251.25 | $10.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 23 | 14 | 16 | 31 | 4 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +0.6% | +3.3% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 4 | 2 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $1.76 | $8.00 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.0% | +0.1% | +1.4% | +1.2% | 0.0% |
IDCC leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). SIMO leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Total Returns). 2 tied.
CEVA vs RMBS vs IDCC vs SIMO vs QUIK: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CEVA or RMBS or IDCC or SIMO or QUIK a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Rambus Inc.
(RMBS) is the stronger pick with 27. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -5. 1% for QuickLogic Corporation (QUIK). Silicon Motion Technology Corporation (SIMO) offers the better valuation at 16. 6x trailing P/E (29. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate CEVA, Inc. (CEVA) a "Buy" — based on 23 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 — CEVA or RMBS or IDCC or SIMO or QUIK?
On trailing P/E, Silicon Motion Technology Corporation (SIMO) is the cheapest at 16.
6x versus Rambus Inc. at 60. 0x. On forward P/E, Silicon Motion Technology Corporation is actually cheaper at 29. 9x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Silicon Motion Technology Corporation wins at 0. 66x versus InterDigital, Inc. 's 0. 74x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CEVA or RMBS or IDCC or SIMO or QUIK?
Over the past 5 years, Rambus Inc.
(RMBS) delivered a total return of +553. 9%, compared to -35. 4% for CEVA, Inc. (CEVA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: RMBS returned +1011% versus QUIK's +25. 4%. 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 — CEVA or RMBS or IDCC or SIMO or QUIK?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), InterDigital, Inc.
(IDCC) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 12β versus Rambus Inc. 's 3. 00β — meaning RMBS is approximately 169% more volatile than IDCC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, CEVA, Inc. (CEVA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 88% for QuickLogic Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CEVA or RMBS or IDCC or SIMO or QUIK?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Rambus Inc.
(RMBS) is pulling ahead at 27. 1% versus -5. 1% for QuickLogic Corporation (QUIK). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Silicon Motion Technology Corporation grew EPS 38. 3% year-over-year, compared to -1233. 3% for QuickLogic Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, IDCC leads at 22. 1% 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 — CEVA or RMBS or IDCC or SIMO or QUIK?
InterDigital, Inc.
(IDCC) is the more profitable company, earning 48. 8% net margin versus -19. 1% for QuickLogic Corporation — meaning it keeps 48. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: IDCC leads at 55. 3% versus -17. 1% for QUIK. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CEVA leads at 88. 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 CEVA or RMBS or IDCC or SIMO or QUIK 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, Silicon Motion Technology Corporation (SIMO) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 66x versus InterDigital, Inc. 's 0. 74x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Silicon Motion Technology Corporation (SIMO) trades at 29. 9x forward P/E versus 67. 3x for CEVA, Inc. — 37. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for IDCC: 52. 5% to $425. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — CEVA or RMBS or IDCC or SIMO or QUIK?
In this comparison, SIMO (3.
3% yield), IDCC (0. 6% yield) pay a dividend. CEVA, RMBS, QUIK do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CEVA or RMBS or IDCC or SIMO or QUIK better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, InterDigital, Inc.
(IDCC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 12), 0. 6% yield, +436. 7% 10Y return). QuickLogic Corporation (QUIK) carries a higher beta of 2. 36 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (IDCC: +436. 7%, QUIK: +25. 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.
10What are the main differences between CEVA and RMBS and IDCC and SIMO and QUIK?
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: CEVA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; RMBS is a mid-cap high-growth stock; IDCC is a small-cap quality compounder stock; SIMO is a small-cap deep-value stock; QUIK is a small-cap quality compounder stock. IDCC, SIMO pay a dividend while CEVA, RMBS, QUIK 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.