Auto - Parts
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CPS vs AMZN vs MSFT vs SMP vs AAPL
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Specialty Retail
Software - Infrastructure
Auto - Parts
Consumer Electronics
CPS vs AMZN vs MSFT vs SMP vs AAPL — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Auto - Parts | Specialty Retail | Software - Infrastructure | Auto - Parts | Consumer Electronics |
| Market Cap | $542M | $2.92T | $3.13T | $871M | $4.22T |
| Revenue (TTM) | $688.43B | $742.78B | $318.27B | $1.83B | $451.44B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-33.31B | $90.80B | $125.22B | $46M | $122.58B |
| Gross Margin | 12.0% | 50.6% | 68.3% | 30.6% | 47.9% |
| Operating Margin | 0.0% | 11.5% | 46.8% | 10.1% | 32.6% |
| Forward P/E | 10.9x | 34.8x | 25.3x | 8.9x | 33.8x |
| Total Debt | $1.26B | $152.99B | $112.18B | $682M | $112.38B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $198M | $86.81B | $30.24B | $72M | $35.93B |
CPS vs AMZN vs MSFT vs SMP vs AAPL — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cooper-Standard Hol… (CPS) | 100 | 290.8 | +190.8% |
| Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) | 100 | 222.1 | +122.1% |
| Microsoft Corporati… (MSFT) | 100 | 229.7 | +129.7% |
| Standard Motor Prod… (SMP) | 100 | 92.5 | -7.5% |
| Apple Inc. (AAPL) | 100 | 361.6 | +261.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CPS vs AMZN vs MSFT vs SMP vs AAPL
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, CPS 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
- PEG 1.24 vs 1.89
MSFT is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 14.9%, EPS growth 15.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 12.4%
- 39.3% margin vs CPS's -4.8%
SMP carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 5 yrs, beta 0.81, yield 3.1%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.81, Low D/E 97.7%, current ratio 2.13x
- Beta 0.81, yield 3.1%, current ratio 2.13x
- 22.4% revenue growth vs CPS's 0.4%
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 MSFT's -2.1%
- 34.0% ROA vs CPS's -7.2%, ROIC 67.4% vs 8.6%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 22.4% revenue growth vs CPS's 0.4% | |
| Value | PEG 1.24 vs 1.89 | |
| Quality / Margins | 39.3% margin vs CPS's -4.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.81 vs CPS's 1.52 | |
| Dividends | 3.1% yield, 5-year raise streak, vs MSFT's 0.8%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +47.0% vs MSFT's -2.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 34.0% ROA vs CPS's -7.2%, ROIC 67.4% vs 8.6% |
CPS vs AMZN vs MSFT vs SMP vs AAPL — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CPS vs AMZN vs MSFT vs SMP vs AAPL — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
AAPL leads in 2 of 6 categories
MSFT leads 1 • CPS leads 0 • AMZN leads 0 • SMP 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 — 406.1x SMP's $1.8B. MSFT is the more profitable business, keeping 39.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CPS's -4.8%. On growth, CPS holds the edge at +1027.9% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $688.4B | $742.8B | $318.3B | $1.8B | $451.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $210M | $155.9B | $192.6B | $229M | $160.0B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$33.3B | $90.8B | $125.2B | $46M | $122.6B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$93.1B | -$2.5B | $72.9B | $39M | $129.2B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +12.0% | +50.6% | +68.3% | +30.6% | +47.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +0.0% | +11.5% | +46.8% | +10.1% | +32.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -4.8% | +12.2% | +39.3% | +2.5% | +27.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -13.5% | -0.3% | +22.9% | +2.2% | +28.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +1027.9% | +16.6% | +18.3% | +9.1% | +16.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -22.4% | +74.8% | +23.4% | +33.9% | +21.8% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — CPS and SMP each lead in 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 21.4x trailing earnings, SMP trades at a 45% 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 | $542M | $2.92T | $3.13T | $871M | $4.22T |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.6B | $2.98T | $3.21T | $1.5B | $4.30T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -132.65x | 37.82x | 30.86x | 21.38x | 38.53x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 10.88x | 34.77x | 25.34x | 8.95x | 33.78x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.35x | 1.64x | — | 2.16x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 7.84x | 20.47x | 19.72x | 6.50x | 29.68x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.20x | 4.07x | 11.10x | 0.49x | 10.14x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 7.14x | 9.15x | 1.27x | 58.49x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 33.34x | 378.98x | 43.66x | 46.55x | 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 $7 for SMP. MSFT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.33x 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 CPS's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | +23.3% | +33.1% | +6.6% | +146.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -7.2% | +11.5% | +19.2% | +2.3% | +34.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +8.6% | +14.7% | +24.9% | +10.8% | +67.4% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +9.2% | +15.3% | +29.7% | +12.8% | +69.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.37x | 0.33x | 0.98x | 1.52x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.1B | $66.2B | $81.9B | $610M | $76.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $198M | $86.8B | $30.2B | $72M | $35.9B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.3B | $153.0B | $112.2B | $682M | $112.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.91x | 39.96x | 55.65x | 5.79x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
AAPL leads this category, winning 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 $8,747 for CPS. Over the past 12 months, AAPL leads with a +47.0% total return vs MSFT's -2.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CPS at 38.4% vs SMP's 5.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -6.4% | +19.7% | -10.8% | +7.0% | +6.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +21.6% | +43.7% | -2.1% | +44.7% | +47.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +165.3% | +156.2% | +39.5% | +16.9% | +67.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -12.5% | +64.8% | +72.5% | -5.3% | +124.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -63.7% | +697.8% | +787.7% | +29.9% | +1174.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +38.4% | +36.8% | +11.7% | +5.3% | +18.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — SMP and AAPL each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
SMP is the less volatile stock with a 0.81 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CPS's 1.52 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 CPS's 63.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.52x | 1.51x | 0.89x | 0.81x | 0.99x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $47.77 | $278.56 | $555.45 | $46.00 | $292.13 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $19.32 | $185.01 | $356.28 | $27.91 | $193.25 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +63.9% | +97.3% | +75.8% | +85.5% | +98.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 51.1 | 81.1 | 54.0 | 57.1 | 69.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 198K | 45.5M | 32.5M | 120K | 39.8M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — MSFT and SMP each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CPS as "Hold", AMZN as "Buy", MSFT as "Buy", SMP as "Buy", AAPL as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 80.3% upside for CPS (target: $55) vs 10.3% for AAPL (target: $317). For income investors, SMP offers the higher dividend yield at 3.08% vs AAPL's 0.36%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $55.00 | $306.77 | $551.75 | — | $317.11 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 10 | 94 | 81 | 12 | 110 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +0.8% | +3.1% | +0.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | — | 19 | 5 | 14 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $3.23 | $1.21 | $1.03 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.6% | 0.0% | +2.1% |
AAPL leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). MSFT leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 3 tied.
CPS vs AMZN vs MSFT vs SMP vs AAPL: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CPS or AMZN or MSFT or SMP or AAPL a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Standard Motor Products, Inc.
(SMP) is the stronger pick with 22. 4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 0. 4% for Cooper-Standard Holdings Inc. (CPS). Standard Motor Products, Inc. (SMP) offers the better valuation at 21. 4x trailing P/E (8. 9x 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 — CPS or AMZN or MSFT or SMP or AAPL?
On trailing P/E, Standard Motor Products, Inc.
(SMP) is the cheapest at 21. 4x versus Apple Inc. at 38. 5x. On forward P/E, Standard Motor Products, Inc. is actually cheaper at 8. 9x. 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 — CPS or AMZN or MSFT or SMP or AAPL?
Over the past 5 years, Apple Inc.
(AAPL) delivered a total return of +124. 4%, compared to -12. 5% for Cooper-Standard Holdings Inc. (CPS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AAPL returned +1174% versus CPS's -63. 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 — CPS or AMZN or MSFT or SMP or AAPL?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Standard Motor Products, Inc.
(SMP) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 81β versus Cooper-Standard Holdings Inc. 's 1. 52β — meaning CPS is approximately 86% more volatile than SMP relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 33% versus 152% for Apple Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CPS or AMZN or MSFT or SMP or AAPL?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Standard Motor Products, Inc.
(SMP) is pulling ahead at 22. 4% versus 0. 4% for Cooper-Standard Holdings Inc. (CPS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Cooper-Standard Holdings Inc. grew EPS 94. 9% year-over-year, compared to -23. 7% for Standard Motor Products, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, MSFT leads at 12. 4% 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 — CPS or AMZN or MSFT or SMP or AAPL?
Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the more profitable company, earning 36.
1% net margin versus -0. 2% for Cooper-Standard Holdings Inc. — 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 3. 9% for CPS. 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 CPS or AMZN or MSFT or SMP 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, Standard Motor Products, Inc. (SMP) trades at 8. 9x forward P/E versus 34. 8x for Amazon. com, Inc. — 25. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CPS: 80. 3% to $55. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — CPS or AMZN or MSFT or SMP or AAPL?
In this comparison, SMP (3.
1% yield), MSFT (0. 8% yield), AAPL (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. CPS, AMZN do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CPS or AMZN or MSFT or SMP 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). Cooper-Standard Holdings Inc. (CPS) carries a higher beta of 1. 52 — 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%, CPS: -63. 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 CPS and AMZN and MSFT and SMP and AAPL?
These companies operate in different sectors (CPS (Consumer Cyclical) and AMZN (Consumer Cyclical) and MSFT (Technology) and SMP (Consumer Cyclical) and AAPL (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: CPS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; AMZN is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; MSFT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; SMP is a small-cap high-growth stock; AAPL is a mega-cap quality compounder stock. MSFT, SMP pay a dividend while CPS, AMZN, 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.