Communication Equipment
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
FKWL vs QCOM vs VZ vs AVGO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Semiconductors
Telecommunications Services
Semiconductors
FKWL vs QCOM vs VZ vs AVGO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Communication Equipment | Semiconductors | Telecommunications Services | Semiconductors |
| Market Cap | $41M | $213.51B | $198.61B | $1.96T |
| Revenue (TTM) | $40M | $44.49B | $138.19B | $68.28B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $187K | $9.92B | $17.17B | $24.97B |
| Gross Margin | 19.0% | 54.8% | 55.7% | 67.1% |
| Operating Margin | -6.7% | 25.5% | 21.2% | 40.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | 18.8x | 9.5x | 36.5x |
| Total Debt | $1M | $16.37B | $200.59B | $65.14B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $15M | $7.84B | $19.05B | $16.18B |
FKWL vs QCOM vs VZ vs AVGO — 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% |
| Verizon Communicati… (VZ) | 100 | 82.1 | -17.9% |
| Broadcom Inc. (AVGO) | 100 | 1416.3 | +1316.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: FKWL vs QCOM vs VZ vs AVGO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
FKWL has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- 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
- 49.6% revenue growth vs VZ's 2.5%
- Beta 0.01 vs AVGO's 1.96, lower leverage
QCOM is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 23 yrs, beta 1.55, yield 1.7%
- Beta 1.55, yield 1.7%, current ratio 2.82x
- 18.4% ROA vs FKWL's 0.4%, ROIC 29.1% vs -8.6%
VZ is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if value and dividends is your priority.
- Lower P/E (9.5x vs 18.8x)
- 5.8% yield, 11-year raise streak, vs QCOM's 1.7%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
AVGO is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 29.0% 10Y total return vs QCOM's 350.2%
- PEG 0.73 vs QCOM's 9.06
- 36.6% margin vs FKWL's 0.5%
- +102.6% vs FKWL's -24.2%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 49.6% revenue growth vs VZ's 2.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (9.5x vs 18.8x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 36.6% margin vs FKWL's 0.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.01 vs AVGO's 1.96, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 5.8% yield, 11-year raise streak, vs QCOM's 1.7%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +102.6% vs FKWL's -24.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 18.4% ROA vs FKWL's 0.4%, ROIC 29.1% vs -8.6% |
FKWL vs QCOM vs VZ vs AVGO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
FKWL vs QCOM vs VZ vs AVGO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
AVGO leads in 2 of 6 categories
QCOM leads 1 • FKWL leads 0 • VZ leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AVGO leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
VZ is the larger business by revenue, generating $138.2B annually — 3488.7x FKWL's $40M. AVGO is the more profitable business, keeping 36.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FKWL's 0.5%. On growth, AVGO holds the edge at +29.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $40M | $44.5B | $138.2B | $68.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$2M | $12.8B | $47.6B | $38.8B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $187,072 | $9.9B | $17.2B | $25.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$9M | $12.5B | $19.8B | $28.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +19.0% | +54.8% | +55.7% | +67.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -6.7% | +25.5% | +21.2% | +40.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +0.5% | +22.3% | +12.4% | +36.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -23.9% | +28.1% | +14.3% | +42.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -33.1% | -3.5% | +2.0% | +29.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +134.2% | +173.0% | -53.4% | +31.6% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — FKWL and VZ each lead in 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 11.6x trailing earnings, VZ trades at a 87% valuation discount to AVGO's 86.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), AVGO offers better value at 1.73x vs QCOM's 19.44x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $41M | $213.5B | $198.6B | $1.96T |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $27M | $222.0B | $380.2B | $2.00T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -167.96x | 40.43x | 11.60x | 86.49x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 18.84x | 9.52x | 36.45x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 19.44x | — | 1.73x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 15.91x | 7.99x | 58.52x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.88x | 4.82x | 1.44x | 30.62x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.08x | 10.56x | 1.88x | 24.63x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 22.51x | 16.65x | 9.87x | 72.67x |
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 $0 for FKWL. FKWL carries lower financial leverage with a 0.04x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to VZ's 1.90x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), AVGO scores 8/9 vs VZ's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +0.5% | +40.2% | +16.4% | +32.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.4% | +18.4% | +4.4% | +14.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -8.6% | +29.1% | +8.0% | +14.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -7.5% | +28.9% | +8.8% | +16.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 6 | 4 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.04x | 0.77x | 1.90x | 0.80x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$13M | $8.5B | $181.5B | $49.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $15M | $7.8B | $19.0B | $16.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1M | $16.4B | $200.6B | $65.1B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 17.60x | 4.39x | 9.24x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
AVGO leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in AVGO five years ago would be worth $93,355 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,954 for FKWL. Over the past 12 months, AVGO leads with a +102.6% total return vs FKWL's -24.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors AVGO at 88.2% vs FKWL's -1.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -19.9% | +17.6% | +19.7% | +18.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -24.2% | +42.9% | +13.6% | +102.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -4.1% | +96.4% | +45.9% | +566.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -70.5% | +58.5% | +2.8% | +833.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +38.9% | +350.2% | +41.6% | +2897.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -1.4% | +25.2% | +13.4% | +88.2% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — VZ and AVGO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
VZ is the less volatile stock with a -0.11 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than AVGO's 1.96 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. AVGO currently trades 94.3% 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 | -0.11x | 1.96x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $5.48 | $223.66 | $51.68 | $437.68 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $3.44 | $121.99 | $10.60 | $198.43 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +63.1% | +90.6% | +91.1% | +94.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 38.4 | 80.1 | 49.3 | 68.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 7K | 15.1M | 24.3M | 23.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — QCOM and VZ each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: QCOM as "Hold", VZ as "Hold", AVGO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 9.5% upside for VZ (target: $52) vs -13.6% for QCOM (target: $175). For income investors, VZ offers the higher dividend yield at 5.76% vs AVGO's 0.56%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $175.00 | $51.56 | $443.72 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 69 | 60 | 58 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.7% | +5.8% | +0.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 23 | 11 | 16 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $3.44 | $2.71 | $2.30 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.0% | +4.1% | 0.0% | +0.3% |
AVGO leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). QCOM leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
FKWL vs QCOM vs VZ vs AVGO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is FKWL or QCOM or VZ or AVGO 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. 5% for Verizon Communications Inc. (VZ). Verizon Communications Inc. (VZ) offers the better valuation at 11. 6x trailing P/E (9. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Broadcom Inc. (AVGO) a "Buy" — based on 58 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 QCOM or VZ or AVGO?
On trailing P/E, Verizon Communications Inc.
(VZ) is the cheapest at 11. 6x versus Broadcom Inc. at 86. 5x. On forward P/E, Verizon Communications Inc. is actually cheaper at 9. 5x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Broadcom Inc. wins at 0. 73x versus QUALCOMM Incorporated's 9. 06x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — FKWL or QCOM or VZ or AVGO?
Over the past 5 years, Broadcom Inc.
(AVGO) delivered a total return of +833. 6%, compared to -70. 5% for Franklin Wireless Corp. (FKWL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AVGO returned +29. 0% 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.
04Which is safer — FKWL or QCOM or VZ or AVGO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Verizon Communications Inc.
(VZ) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 11β versus Broadcom Inc. 's 1. 96β — meaning AVGO is approximately -1950% more volatile than VZ relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Franklin Wireless Corp. (FKWL) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 4% versus 190% for Verizon Communications Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — FKWL or QCOM or VZ or AVGO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Franklin Wireless Corp.
(FKWL) is pulling ahead at 49. 6% versus 2. 5% for Verizon Communications Inc. (VZ). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Broadcom Inc. grew EPS 287. 8% year-over-year, compared to -44. 2% for QUALCOMM Incorporated. Over a 3-year CAGR, AVGO leads at 24. 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 — FKWL or QCOM or VZ or AVGO?
Broadcom Inc.
(AVGO) is the more profitable company, earning 36. 2% net margin versus -0. 5% for Franklin Wireless Corp. — meaning it keeps 36. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: AVGO leads at 39. 9% versus -6. 2% for FKWL. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — AVGO leads at 67. 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 QCOM or VZ or AVGO 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, Broadcom Inc. (AVGO) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 73x versus QUALCOMM Incorporated's 9. 06x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Verizon Communications Inc. (VZ) trades at 9. 5x forward P/E versus 36. 5x for Broadcom Inc. — 26. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for VZ: 9. 5% to $51. 56.
08Which pays a better dividend — FKWL or QCOM or VZ or AVGO?
In this comparison, VZ (5.
8% yield), QCOM (1. 7% yield), AVGO (0. 6% yield) pay a dividend. FKWL does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is FKWL or QCOM or VZ or AVGO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Verizon Communications Inc.
(VZ) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 11), 5. 8% yield). Broadcom Inc. (AVGO) carries a higher beta of 1. 96 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (VZ: +41. 6%, AVGO: +29. 0%), 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 QCOM and VZ and AVGO?
These companies operate in different sectors (FKWL (Technology) and QCOM (Technology) and VZ (Communication Services) and AVGO (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: FKWL is a small-cap high-growth stock; QCOM is a large-cap quality compounder stock; VZ is a mid-cap deep-value stock; AVGO is a mega-cap high-growth stock. QCOM, VZ, AVGO pay 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 all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.