Telecommunications Services
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
CTDD vs LUMN vs T vs FYBR
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Telecommunications Services
Telecommunications Services
Telecommunications Services
CTDD vs LUMN vs T vs FYBR — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Telecommunications Services | Telecommunications Services | Telecommunications Services | Telecommunications Services |
| Market Cap | $19.00 | $8.71B | $176.40B | $9.64B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $4.95B | $12.12B | $126.52B | $6.11B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $1.13B | $-1.74B | $21.41B | $-381M |
| Gross Margin | 37.5% | 35.2% | 79.7% | 65.1% |
| Operating Margin | 31.0% | -2.6% | 19.4% | 5.3% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 10.9x | — |
| Total Debt | $1.99B | $17.71B | $173.99B | $12.03B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $26M | $1.00B | $18.23B | $806M |
CTDD vs LUMN vs T vs FYBR — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Qwest Corp. 6.75% N… (CTDD) | 100 | 73.2 | -26.8% |
| Lumen Technologies,… (LUMN) | 100 | 61.1 | -38.9% |
| AT&T Inc. (T) | 100 | 113.7 | +13.7% |
| Frontier Communicat… (FYBR) | 100 | 152.4 | +52.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CTDD vs LUMN vs T vs FYBR
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CTDD has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.74, Low D/E 16.3%, current ratio 1.35x
- 22.8% margin vs LUMN's -14.3%
- 6.3% ROA vs LUMN's -5.3%, ROIC 11.3% vs -0.8%
LUMN is the clearest fit if your priority is defensive.
- Beta 2.74, yield 0.0%, current ratio 1.80x
- +100.0% vs T's -6.2%
T is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and growth exposure is your priority.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta -0.26, yield 4.5%
- Rev growth 2.7%, EPS growth 104.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 1.3%
- Better valuation composite
- 4.5% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs LUMN's 0.0%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
FYBR is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 42.8% 10Y total return vs T's 41.9%
- 3.2% revenue growth vs CTDD's -6.9%
- Beta 0.06 vs LUMN's 2.74
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 3.2% revenue growth vs CTDD's -6.9% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 22.8% margin vs LUMN's -14.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.06 vs LUMN's 2.74 | |
| Dividends | 4.5% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs LUMN's 0.0%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +100.0% vs T's -6.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 6.3% ROA vs LUMN's -5.3%, ROIC 11.3% vs -0.8% |
CTDD vs LUMN vs T vs FYBR — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CTDD vs LUMN vs T vs FYBR — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CTDD leads in 2 of 6 categories
LUMN leads 1 • T leads 1 • FYBR leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — CTDD and FYBR each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
T is the larger business by revenue, generating $126.5B annually — 25.5x CTDD's $5.0B. CTDD is the more profitable business, keeping 22.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to LUMN's -14.3%. On growth, FYBR holds the edge at +4.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $5.0B | $12.1B | $126.5B | $6.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $2.3B | $2.4B | $45.1B | $2.1B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $1.1B | -$1.7B | $21.4B | -$381M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $261M | $5.4B | $10.6B | -$1.4B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +37.5% | +35.2% | +79.7% | +65.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +31.0% | -2.6% | +19.4% | +5.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +22.8% | -14.3% | +16.9% | -6.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +5.3% | +44.9% | +8.4% | -23.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -14.8% | -8.9% | +2.9% | +4.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | 0.0% | -11.5% | +9.1% |
Valuation Metrics
CTDD leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, CTDD's 0.7x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than FYBR's 10.5x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $19 | $8.7B | $176.4B | $9.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.0B | $25.4B | $332.2B | $20.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | — | -4.83x | 8.31x | -29.61x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 10.93x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 0.70x | 9.91x | 7.37x | 10.55x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.00x | 0.70x | 1.40x | 1.62x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.00x | — | 1.41x | 1.93x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 0.00x | 23.49x | 9.07x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
CTDD leads this category, winning 8 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
T delivers a 16.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $17 in annual profit, vs $-79 for LUMN. CTDD carries lower financial leverage with a 0.16x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to FYBR's 2.44x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CTDD scores 7/9 vs LUMN's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +8.7% | -79.4% | +16.8% | -8.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +6.3% | -5.3% | +5.1% | -1.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +11.3% | -0.8% | +6.7% | +1.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +12.9% | -0.6% | +6.8% | +1.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 4 | 7 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.16x | — | 1.35x | 2.44x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $2.0B | $16.7B | $155.8B | $11.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $26M | $1.0B | $18.2B | $806M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $2.0B | $17.7B | $174.0B | $12.0B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 33.08x | -1.12x | 4.97x | 0.44x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LUMN leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in FYBR five years ago would be worth $14,855 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $7,119 for LUMN. Over the past 12 months, LUMN leads with a +100.0% total return vs T's -6.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors LUMN at 54.4% vs T's 18.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +0.6% | +10.0% | +5.1% | +1.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +22.3% | +100.0% | -6.2% | +5.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +94.5% | +267.8% | +67.0% | +105.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +5.4% | -28.8% | +29.9% | +48.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +37.9% | -35.7% | +41.9% | +42.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +24.8% | +54.4% | +18.6% | +27.1% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — T and FYBR each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
T is the less volatile stock with a -0.26 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. FYBR currently trades 100.0% from its 52-week high vs LUMN's 70.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.74x | 2.74x | -0.26x | 0.06x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $21.40 | $11.95 | $29.79 | $38.50 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $8.48 | $3.37 | $22.95 | $36.04 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +90.7% | +70.8% | +84.8% | +100.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 57.5 | 73.4 | 38.9 | 72.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 63K | 12.5M | 33.7M | 0 |
Analyst Outlook
T leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: LUMN as "Hold", T as "Hold", FYBR as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 16.5% upside for T (target: $29) vs -16.3% for LUMN (target: $7). T is the only dividend payer here at 4.51% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $7.08 | $29.42 | $34.33 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 28 | 62 | 11 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.0% | +4.5% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.00 | $1.14 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +2.6% | +0.7% |
CTDD leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). LUMN leads in 1 (Total Returns). 2 tied.
CTDD vs LUMN vs T vs FYBR: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CTDD or LUMN or T or FYBR a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Frontier Communications Parent, Inc.
(FYBR) is the stronger pick with 3. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -6. 9% for Qwest Corp. 6. 75% NT 57 (CTDD). 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 Frontier Communications Parent, Inc. (FYBR) a "Buy" — based on 11 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 is the better long-term investment — CTDD or LUMN or T or FYBR?
Over the past 5 years, Frontier Communications Parent, Inc.
(FYBR) delivered a total return of +48. 6%, compared to -28. 8% for Lumen Technologies, Inc. (LUMN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: FYBR returned +42. 8% 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.
03Which is safer — CTDD or LUMN or T or FYBR?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), AT&T Inc.
(T) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 26β versus Lumen Technologies, Inc. 's 2. 74β — meaning LUMN is approximately -1156% more volatile than T relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Qwest Corp. 6. 75% NT 57 (CTDD) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 16% versus 2% for Frontier Communications Parent, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — CTDD or LUMN or T or FYBR?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Frontier Communications Parent, Inc.
(FYBR) is pulling ahead at 3. 2% versus -6. 9% for Qwest Corp. 6. 75% NT 57 (CTDD). 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, T leads at 1. 3% 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.
05Which has better profit margins — CTDD or LUMN or T or FYBR?
Qwest Corp.
6. 75% NT 57 (CTDD) is the more profitable company, earning 27. 0% net margin versus -14. 0% for Lumen Technologies, Inc. — meaning it keeps 27. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CTDD leads at 37. 2% versus -1. 5% for LUMN. 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.
06Is CTDD or LUMN or T or FYBR more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for T: 16.
5% to $29. 42.
07Which pays a better dividend — CTDD or LUMN or T or FYBR?
In this comparison, T (4.
5% yield) pays a dividend. CTDD, LUMN, FYBR do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
08Is CTDD or LUMN or T or FYBR better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, AT&T Inc.
(T) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 26), 4. 5% yield). 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 (T: +41. 9%, 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.
09What are the main differences between CTDD and LUMN and T and FYBR?
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: CTDD is a small-cap quality compounder stock; LUMN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; T is a mid-cap deep-value stock; FYBR is a small-cap quality compounder stock. T pays a dividend while CTDD, LUMN, FYBR 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.
- 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.