Communication Equipment
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
FKWL vs NTGR vs CALX vs QCOM vs MRVL
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Communication Equipment
Software - Application
Semiconductors
Semiconductors
FKWL vs NTGR vs CALX vs QCOM vs MRVL — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Communication Equipment | Communication Equipment | Software - Application | Semiconductors | Semiconductors |
| Market Cap | $41M | $751M | $2.79B | $230.92B | $147.33B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $40M | $690M | $1.06B | $44.49B | $8.19B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $187K | $-40M | $34M | $9.92B | $2.67B |
| Gross Margin | 19.0% | 37.5% | 57.1% | 54.8% | 51.0% |
| Operating Margin | -6.7% | -4.4% | 3.8% | 25.5% | 16.1% |
| Forward P/E | — | 137.3x | 24.3x | 20.4x | 44.3x |
| Total Debt | $1M | $51M | $26M | $16.37B | $4.47B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $15M | $210M | $143M | $7.84B | $2.64B |
FKWL vs NTGR vs CALX vs QCOM vs MRVL — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Franklin Wireless C… (FKWL) | 100 | 60.4 | -39.6% |
| NETGEAR, Inc. (NTGR) | 100 | 106.8 | +6.8% |
| Calix, Inc. (CALX) | 100 | 306.7 | +206.7% |
| QUALCOMM Incorporat… (QCOM) | 100 | 270.9 | +170.9% |
| Marvell Technology,… (MRVL) | 100 | 521.6 | +421.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: FKWL vs NTGR vs CALX vs QCOM vs MRVL
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
FKWL ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 49.6%, EPS growth 93.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 24.3%
- 49.6% revenue growth vs NTGR's 2.9%
Among these 5 stocks, NTGR doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
CALX is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.98, Low D/E 3.0%, current ratio 4.24x
- Beta 0.98, current ratio 4.24x
- Beta 0.98 vs MRVL's 2.27, lower leverage
QCOM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability.
- Dividend streak 23 yrs, beta 1.64, yield 1.6%
- Lower P/E (20.4x vs 44.3x)
- 1.6% yield, 23-year raise streak, vs MRVL's 0.1%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
- 18.4% ROA vs NTGR's -4.9%, ROIC 29.1% vs -8.4%
MRVL is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 16.9% 10Y total return vs CALX's 5.1%
- 32.6% margin vs NTGR's -5.8%
- +195.6% vs FKWL's -25.6%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 49.6% revenue growth vs NTGR's 2.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (20.4x vs 44.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 32.6% margin vs NTGR's -5.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.98 vs MRVL's 2.27, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.6% yield, 23-year raise streak, vs MRVL's 0.1%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +195.6% vs FKWL's -25.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 18.4% ROA vs NTGR's -4.9%, ROIC 29.1% vs -8.4% |
FKWL vs NTGR vs CALX vs QCOM vs MRVL — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
FKWL vs NTGR vs CALX vs QCOM vs MRVL — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
QCOM leads in 2 of 6 categories
CALX leads 1 • MRVL leads 1 • FKWL leads 0 • NTGR leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CALX leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
QCOM is the larger business by revenue, generating $44.5B annually — 1123.1x FKWL's $40M. MRVL is the more profitable business, keeping 32.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NTGR's -5.8%. On growth, CALX holds the edge at +27.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $40M | $690M | $1.1B | $44.5B | $8.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$2M | -$19M | $57M | $12.8B | $2.3B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $187,072 | -$40M | $34M | $9.9B | $2.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$9M | -$11M | $109M | $12.5B | $1.4B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +19.0% | +37.5% | +57.1% | +54.8% | +51.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -6.7% | -4.4% | +3.8% | +25.5% | +16.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +0.5% | -5.8% | +3.2% | +22.3% | +32.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -23.9% | -1.6% | +10.3% | +28.1% | +17.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -33.1% | -2.0% | +27.1% | -3.5% | +22.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +134.2% | -123.8% | +3.3% | +173.0% | +100.0% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — FKWL and QCOM each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 43.7x trailing earnings, QCOM trades at a 74% valuation discount to CALX's 166.3x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, QCOM's 17.2x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than MRVL's 112.8x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $41M | $751M | $2.8B | $230.9B | $147.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $27M | $592M | $2.7B | $239.5B | $149.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -166.99x | -24.10x | 166.31x | 43.73x | 55.42x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 137.35x | 24.33x | 20.37x | 44.32x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 21.03x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 69.15x | 17.16x | 112.76x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.88x | 1.08x | 2.79x | 5.21x | 17.98x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.07x | 1.59x | 3.54x | 11.42x | 10.34x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 22.38x | — | 24.18x | 18.01x | 105.51x |
Profitability & Efficiency
QCOM leads this category, winning 5 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 $-8 for NTGR. CALX carries lower financial leverage with a 0.03x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to QCOM's 0.77x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), FKWL scores 7/9 vs NTGR's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +0.5% | -8.0% | +4.2% | +40.2% | +19.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.4% | -4.9% | +3.5% | +18.4% | +12.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -8.6% | -8.4% | +2.1% | +29.1% | +6.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -7.5% | -6.0% | +2.5% | +28.9% | +7.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.04x | 0.10x | 0.03x | 0.77x | 0.31x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$13M | -$159M | -$118M | $8.5B | $1.8B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $15M | $210M | $143M | $7.8B | $2.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1M | $51M | $26M | $16.4B | $4.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | — | — | 17.60x | 15.17x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MRVL leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MRVL five years ago would be worth $38,657 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,919 for FKWL. Over the past 12 months, MRVL leads with a +195.6% total return vs FKWL's -25.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MRVL at 60.9% vs FKWL's -1.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -20.4% | +13.0% | -19.3% | +27.2% | +90.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -25.6% | -5.0% | +1.4% | +53.4% | +195.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -4.7% | +97.9% | +1.5% | +111.7% | +316.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -70.8% | -27.3% | -0.1% | +82.3% | +286.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +38.1% | -33.9% | +509.0% | +382.4% | +1686.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -1.6% | +25.6% | +0.5% | +28.4% | +60.9% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — FKWL and MRVL each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
FKWL is the less volatile stock with a -0.02 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than MRVL's 2.27 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MRVL currently trades 96.8% from its 52-week high vs CALX's 60.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -0.02x | 1.43x | 0.98x | 1.64x | 2.27x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $5.48 | $36.86 | $71.22 | $228.04 | $175.79 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $3.42 | $19.00 | $40.75 | $121.99 | $56.69 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +62.8% | +74.5% | +60.7% | +96.1% | +96.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 36.0 | 58.0 | 41.0 | 82.6 | 63.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 8K | 521K | 907K | 15.6M | 24.9M |
Analyst Outlook
QCOM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NTGR as "Hold", CALX as "Buy", QCOM as "Hold", MRVL as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 41.1% upside for CALX (target: $61) vs -21.8% for MRVL (target: $133). For income investors, QCOM offers the higher dividend yield at 1.57% vs MRVL's 0.14%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $36.00 | $61.00 | $185.56 | $133.10 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 17 | 21 | 69 | 72 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +1.6% | +0.1% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 1 | 23 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $3.44 | $0.24 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.0% | +6.7% | +3.4% | +3.8% | +1.4% |
QCOM leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Analyst Outlook). CALX leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 2 tied.
FKWL vs NTGR vs CALX vs QCOM vs MRVL: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is FKWL or NTGR or CALX or QCOM or MRVL a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Franklin Wireless Corp.
(FKWL) is the stronger pick with 49. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 2. 9% for NETGEAR, Inc. (NTGR). QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM) offers the better valuation at 43. 7x trailing P/E (20. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Calix, Inc. (CALX) a "Buy" — based on 21 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 — FKWL or NTGR or CALX or QCOM or MRVL?
On trailing P/E, QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM) is the cheapest at 43.
7x versus Calix, Inc. at 166. 3x. On forward P/E, QUALCOMM Incorporated is actually cheaper at 20. 4x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — FKWL or NTGR or CALX or QCOM or MRVL?
Over the past 5 years, Marvell Technology, Inc.
(MRVL) delivered a total return of +286. 6%, compared to -70. 8% for Franklin Wireless Corp. (FKWL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MRVL returned +1686% versus NTGR's -33. 9%. 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 — FKWL or NTGR or CALX or QCOM or MRVL?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Franklin Wireless Corp.
(FKWL) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 02β versus Marvell Technology, Inc. 's 2. 27β — meaning MRVL is approximately -12327% more volatile than FKWL relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Calix, Inc. (CALX) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 3% versus 77% for QUALCOMM Incorporated — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — FKWL or NTGR or CALX or QCOM or MRVL?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Franklin Wireless Corp.
(FKWL) is pulling ahead at 49. 6% versus 2. 9% for NETGEAR, Inc. (NTGR). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Marvell Technology, Inc. grew EPS 401. 0% year-over-year, compared to -371. 4% for NETGEAR, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, FKWL leads at 24. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — FKWL or NTGR or CALX or QCOM or MRVL?
Marvell Technology, Inc.
(MRVL) is the more profitable company, earning 32. 6% net margin versus -4. 7% for NETGEAR, Inc. — meaning it keeps 32. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: QCOM leads at 27. 9% versus -6. 2% for FKWL. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CALX leads at 56. 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 FKWL or NTGR or CALX or QCOM or MRVL more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM) trades at 20.
4x forward P/E versus 137. 3x for NETGEAR, Inc. — 117. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CALX: 41. 1% to $61. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — FKWL or NTGR or CALX or QCOM or MRVL?
In this comparison, QCOM (1.
6% yield), MRVL (0. 1% yield) pay a dividend. FKWL, NTGR, CALX do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is FKWL or NTGR or CALX or QCOM or MRVL better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Franklin Wireless Corp.
(FKWL) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 02)). Both have compounded well over 10 years (FKWL: +38. 1%, NTGR: -33. 9%), 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 FKWL and NTGR and CALX and QCOM and MRVL?
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: FKWL is a small-cap high-growth stock; NTGR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CALX is a small-cap high-growth stock; QCOM is a large-cap quality compounder stock; MRVL is a mid-cap high-growth stock. QCOM pays a dividend while FKWL, NTGR, CALX, MRVL 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.