Communication Equipment
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
FKWL vs QCOM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Semiconductors
FKWL vs QCOM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Communication Equipment | Semiconductors |
| Market Cap | $41M | $213.51B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $40M | $44.49B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $187K | $9.92B |
| Gross Margin | 19.0% | 54.8% |
| Operating Margin | -6.7% | 25.5% |
| Forward P/E | — | 18.8x |
| Total Debt | $1M | $16.37B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $15M | $7.84B |
FKWL vs QCOM — 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 | 60.7 | -39.3% |
| QUALCOMM Incorporat… (QCOM) | 100 | 250.5 | +150.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: FKWL vs QCOM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
FKWL is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and growth exposure.
- beta 0.01
- Rev growth 49.6%, EPS growth 93.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 24.3%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.01, Low D/E 3.7%, current ratio 3.64x
QCOM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding.
- 350.2% 10Y total return vs FKWL's 38.9%
- Better valuation composite
- 22.3% margin vs FKWL's 0.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 49.6% revenue growth vs QCOM's 13.7% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 22.3% margin vs FKWL's 0.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.01 vs QCOM's 1.55, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.7% yield; 23-year raise streak; the other pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +42.9% vs FKWL's -24.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 18.4% ROA vs FKWL's 0.4%, ROIC 29.1% vs -8.6% |
FKWL vs QCOM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
FKWL vs QCOM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
QCOM leads this category, winning 6 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. QCOM is the more profitable business, keeping 22.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FKWL's 0.5%. On growth, QCOM holds the edge at -3.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $40M | $44.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$2M | $12.8B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $187,072 | $9.9B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$9M | $12.5B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +19.0% | +54.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -6.7% | +25.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +0.5% | +22.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -23.9% | +28.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -33.1% | -3.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +134.2% | +173.0% |
Valuation Metrics
FKWL leads this category, winning 3 of 4 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $41M | $213.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $27M | $222.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -167.96x | 40.43x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 18.84x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 19.44x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 15.91x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.88x | 4.82x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.08x | 10.56x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 22.51x | 16.65x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — FKWL and QCOM each lead in 4 of 8 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
QCOM delivers a 40.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $40 in annual profit, vs $0 for FKWL. FKWL carries lower financial leverage with a 0.04x 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 QCOM's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +0.5% | +40.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.4% | +18.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -8.6% | +29.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -7.5% | +28.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.04x | 0.77x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$13M | $8.5B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $15M | $7.8B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1M | $16.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 17.60x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
QCOM leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in QCOM five years ago would be worth $15,852 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,954 for FKWL. Over the past 12 months, QCOM leads with a +42.9% total return vs FKWL's -24.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors QCOM at 25.2% vs FKWL's -1.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -19.9% | +17.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -24.2% | +42.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -4.1% | +96.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -70.5% | +58.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +38.9% | +350.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -1.4% | +25.2% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — FKWL and QCOM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
FKWL is the less volatile stock with a 0.01 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than QCOM's 1.55 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. QCOM currently trades 90.6% from its 52-week high vs FKWL's 63.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.01x | 1.55x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $5.48 | $223.66 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $3.44 | $121.99 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +63.1% | +90.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 38.4 | 80.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 7K | 15.1M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
QCOM is the only dividend payer here at 1.70% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $175.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 69 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.7% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 23 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $3.44 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.0% | +4.1% |
QCOM leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). FKWL leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
FKWL vs QCOM: Frequently Asked Questions
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is FKWL or QCOM 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 13. 7% for QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM). QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM) offers the better valuation at 40. 4x trailing P/E (18. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM) a "Hold" — based on 69 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 — FKWL or QCOM?
Over the past 5 years, QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM) delivered a total return of +58.
5%, compared to -70. 5% for Franklin Wireless Corp. (FKWL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: QCOM returned +350. 2% versus FKWL's +38. 9%. 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 — FKWL or QCOM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Franklin Wireless Corp.
(FKWL) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 01β versus QUALCOMM Incorporated's 1. 55β — meaning QCOM is approximately 17966% more volatile than FKWL relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Franklin Wireless Corp. (FKWL) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 4% versus 77% for QUALCOMM Incorporated — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — FKWL or QCOM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Franklin Wireless Corp.
(FKWL) is pulling ahead at 49. 6% versus 13. 7% for QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Franklin Wireless Corp. grew EPS 93. 9% year-over-year, compared to -44. 2% for QUALCOMM Incorporated. 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.
05Which has better profit margins — FKWL or QCOM?
QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM) is the more profitable company, earning 12.
5% net margin versus -0. 5% for Franklin Wireless Corp. — 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 -6. 2% for FKWL. 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.
06Which pays a better dividend — FKWL or QCOM?
In this comparison, QCOM (1.
7% yield) pays a dividend. FKWL does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
07Is FKWL or QCOM 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. 01)). QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM) carries a higher beta of 1. 55 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (FKWL: +38. 9%, QCOM: +350. 2%), 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.
08What are the main differences between FKWL 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: FKWL is a small-cap high-growth stock; QCOM is a large-cap quality compounder stock. QCOM pays a dividend while FKWL does 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 both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.