Communication Equipment
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
CRNT vs SATS vs GILT vs QCOM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Communication Equipment
Communication Equipment
Semiconductors
CRNT vs SATS vs GILT vs QCOM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Communication Equipment | Communication Equipment | Communication Equipment | Semiconductors |
| Market Cap | $243M | $31.46B | $842M | $238.32B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $335M | $14.80B | $470M | $44.49B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-2M | $-23.27B | $32M | $9.92B |
| Gross Margin | 34.4% | 39.1% | 30.3% | 54.8% |
| Operating Margin | 3.0% | -116.5% | 5.2% | 25.5% |
| Forward P/E | 20.1x | 314.9x | 22.2x | 21.1x |
| Total Debt | $50M | $31.01B | $11M | $16.37B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $38M | $1.88B | $169M | $7.84B |
CRNT vs SATS vs GILT vs QCOM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ceragon Networks Lt… (CRNT) | 100 | 125.6 | +25.6% |
| EchoStar Corporation (SATS) | 100 | 390.5 | +290.5% |
| Gilat Satellite Net… (GILT) | 100 | 207.1 | +107.1% |
| QUALCOMM Incorporat… (QCOM) | 100 | 247.9 | +147.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CRNT vs SATS vs GILT vs QCOM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CRNT is the clearest fit if your priority is value.
- Lower P/E (20.1x vs 21.1x)
SATS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if stability and momentum is your priority.
- Beta 1.65 vs GILT's 2.25
- +339.0% vs CRNT's +17.9%
GILT is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 47.9%, EPS growth -22.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 23.5%
- 47.9% revenue growth vs CRNT's -14.1%
QCOM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 22 yrs, beta 1.94, yield 1.5%
- 372.1% 10Y total return vs SATS's 177.4%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.94, Low D/E 77.2%, current ratio 2.82x
- Beta 1.94, yield 1.5%, current ratio 2.82x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 47.9% revenue growth vs CRNT's -14.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (20.1x vs 21.1x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 22.3% margin vs SATS's -157.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.65 vs GILT's 2.25 | |
| Dividends | 1.5% yield; 22-year raise streak; the other 3 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +339.0% vs CRNT's +17.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 18.4% ROA vs SATS's -49.1%, ROIC 29.1% vs -32.9% |
CRNT vs SATS vs GILT vs QCOM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
CRNT vs SATS vs GILT vs QCOM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
QCOM leads in 3 of 6 categories
CRNT leads 1 • SATS leads 1 • GILT leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
QCOM leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
QCOM is the larger business by revenue, generating $44.5B annually — 132.8x CRNT's $335M. QCOM is the more profitable business, keeping 22.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to SATS's -157.2%. On growth, GILT holds the edge at +20.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $335M | $14.8B | $470M | $44.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $24M | -$16.0B | $49M | $12.8B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$2M | -$23.3B | $32M | $9.9B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $23M | -$909M | $3M | $12.5B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +34.4% | +39.1% | +30.3% | +54.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +3.0% | -116.5% | +5.2% | +25.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -0.7% | -157.2% | +6.8% | +22.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +6.8% | -6.1% | +0.7% | +28.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -4.1% | -5.2% | +20.0% | -3.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -48.0% | +28.2% | +161.6% | +173.0% |
Valuation Metrics
CRNT leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 38.8x trailing earnings, GILT trades at a 14% valuation discount to QCOM's 45.1x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, CRNT's 10.0x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than QCOM's 17.7x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $243M | $31.5B | $842M | $238.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $254M | $60.6B | $684M | $246.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -115.88x | -2.17x | 38.79x | 45.13x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 20.15x | 314.88x | 22.23x | 21.06x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 21.70x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 10.01x | — | 15.58x | 17.69x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.72x | 2.10x | 1.86x | 5.38x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.40x | 5.40x | 1.59x | 11.78x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 13.52x | — | 91.62x | 18.59x |
Profitability & Efficiency
QCOM leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
QCOM delivers a 40.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $40 in annual profit, vs $-2 for SATS. GILT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.02x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to SATS's 5.33x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), QCOM scores 6/9 vs GILT's 3/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -1.4% | -2.4% | +7.3% | +40.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -0.8% | -49.1% | +4.7% | +18.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +4.7% | -32.9% | +5.7% | +29.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +5.7% | -41.3% | +4.7% | +28.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.29x | 5.33x | 0.02x | 0.77x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $11M | $29.1B | -$158M | $8.5B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $38M | $1.9B | $169M | $7.8B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $50M | $31.0B | $11M | $16.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.65x | -9.93x | 8.81x | 17.60x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
SATS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in SATS five years ago would be worth $40,584 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $7,143 for CRNT. Over the past 12 months, SATS leads with a +339.0% total return vs CRNT's +17.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors SATS at 85.8% vs CRNT's 9.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +23.3% | -2.7% | -1.6% | +31.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +17.9% | +339.0% | +111.4% | +49.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +31.1% | +541.4% | +121.7% | +97.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -28.6% | +305.8% | +33.8% | +82.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +60.7% | +177.4% | +214.6% | +372.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +9.4% | +85.8% | +30.4% | +25.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — SATS and QCOM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
SATS is the less volatile stock with a 1.65 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than GILT's 2.25 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. QCOM currently trades 87.0% from its 52-week high vs GILT's 63.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.04x | 1.65x | 2.25x | 1.94x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $3.29 | $147.25 | $20.93 | $259.92 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.82 | $24.15 | $6.24 | $121.99 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +82.1% | +74.1% | +63.0% | +87.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 46.5 | 41.5 | 38.7 | 50.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 636K | 8.0M | 875K | 21.8M |
Analyst Outlook
QCOM leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CRNT as "Buy", SATS as "Buy", GILT as "Buy", QCOM as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 57.4% upside for CRNT (target: $4) vs -15.5% for QCOM (target: $191). QCOM is the only dividend payer here at 1.52% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $4.25 | $144.00 | $20.00 | $191.05 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 6 | 11 | 2 | 69 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +1.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 0 | 22 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $3.44 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.2% | 0.0% | +3.7% |
QCOM leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). CRNT leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
CRNT vs SATS vs GILT vs QCOM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CRNT or SATS or GILT or QCOM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Gilat Satellite Networks Ltd.
(GILT) is the stronger pick with 47. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -14. 1% for Ceragon Networks Ltd. (CRNT). Gilat Satellite Networks Ltd. (GILT) offers the better valuation at 38. 8x trailing P/E (22. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Ceragon Networks Ltd. (CRNT) a "Buy" — based on 6 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 — CRNT or SATS or GILT or QCOM?
On trailing P/E, Gilat Satellite Networks Ltd.
(GILT) is the cheapest at 38. 8x versus QUALCOMM Incorporated at 45. 1x. On forward P/E, Ceragon Networks Ltd. is actually cheaper at 20. 1x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CRNT or SATS or GILT or QCOM?
Over the past 5 years, EchoStar Corporation (SATS) delivered a total return of +305.
8%, compared to -28. 6% for Ceragon Networks Ltd. (CRNT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: QCOM returned +372. 1% versus CRNT's +60. 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 — CRNT or SATS or GILT or QCOM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), EchoStar Corporation (SATS) is the lower-risk stock at 1.
65β versus Gilat Satellite Networks Ltd. 's 2. 25β — meaning GILT is approximately 36% more volatile than SATS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Gilat Satellite Networks Ltd. (GILT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 5% for EchoStar Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CRNT or SATS or GILT or QCOM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Gilat Satellite Networks Ltd.
(GILT) is pulling ahead at 47. 9% versus -14. 1% for Ceragon Networks Ltd. (CRNT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Gilat Satellite Networks Ltd. grew EPS -22. 7% year-over-year, compared to -113. 6% for EchoStar Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, GILT leads at 23. 5% 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 — CRNT or SATS or GILT or QCOM?
QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM) is the more profitable company, earning 12.
5% net margin versus -155. 1% for EchoStar Corporation — meaning it keeps 12. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: QCOM leads at 27. 9% versus -118. 1% for SATS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — QCOM leads at 55. 4%, 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 CRNT or SATS or GILT or QCOM more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Ceragon Networks Ltd.
(CRNT) trades at 20. 1x forward P/E versus 314. 9x for EchoStar Corporation — 294. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CRNT: 57. 4% to $4. 25.
08Which pays a better dividend — CRNT or SATS or GILT or QCOM?
In this comparison, QCOM (1.
5% yield) pays a dividend. CRNT, SATS, GILT do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CRNT or SATS or GILT or QCOM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (1.
5% yield, +372. 1% 10Y return). Ceragon Networks Ltd. (CRNT) carries a higher beta of 2. 04 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (QCOM: +372. 1%, CRNT: +60. 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 CRNT and SATS and GILT and QCOM?
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: CRNT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; SATS is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; GILT is a small-cap high-growth stock; QCOM is a large-cap quality compounder stock. QCOM pays a dividend while CRNT, SATS, GILT 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.