Communication Equipment
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
FKWL vs SMSI vs CALX vs QCOM vs VZ
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Software - Application
Software - Application
Semiconductors
Telecommunications Services
FKWL vs SMSI vs CALX vs QCOM vs VZ — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Communication Equipment | Software - Application | Software - Application | Semiconductors | Telecommunications Services |
| Market Cap | $41M | $17M | $2.81B | $213.51B | $198.61B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $40M | $17M | $1.06B | $44.49B | $138.19B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $187K | $-28M | $34M | $9.92B | $17.17B |
| Gross Margin | 19.0% | 75.5% | 57.1% | 54.8% | 55.7% |
| Operating Margin | -6.7% | -154.8% | 3.8% | 25.5% | 21.2% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 24.3x | 18.8x | 9.5x |
| Total Debt | $1M | $2M | $26M | $16.37B | $200.59B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $15M | $1M | $143M | $7.84B | $19.05B |
FKWL vs SMSI vs CALX vs QCOM vs VZ — 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% |
| Smith Micro Softwar… (SMSI) | 100 | 2.5 | -97.5% |
| Calix, Inc. (CALX) | 100 | 306.7 | +206.7% |
| QUALCOMM Incorporat… (QCOM) | 100 | 270.9 | +170.9% |
| Verizon Communicati… (VZ) | 100 | 82.3 | -17.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: FKWL vs SMSI vs CALX vs QCOM vs VZ
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
FKWL is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- 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
- Beta 0.01, current ratio 3.64x
- 49.6% revenue growth vs SMSI's -15.5%
SMSI lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
Among these 5 stocks, CALX doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
QCOM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding.
- 350.2% 10Y total return vs CALX's 5.1%
- 22.3% margin vs SMSI's -165.4%
- 1.7% yield, 23-year raise streak, vs VZ's 5.8%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
- +42.9% vs FKWL's -24.2%
VZ ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability.
- Dividend streak 11 yrs, beta -0.11, yield 5.8%
- Lower P/E (9.5x vs 18.8x)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 49.6% revenue growth vs SMSI's -15.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (9.5x vs 18.8x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 22.3% margin vs SMSI's -165.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.01 vs QCOM's 1.55, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.7% yield, 23-year raise streak, vs VZ's 5.8%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +42.9% vs FKWL's -24.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 18.4% ROA vs SMSI's -104.4%, ROIC 29.1% vs -48.3% |
FKWL vs SMSI vs CALX vs QCOM vs VZ — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
FKWL vs SMSI vs CALX vs QCOM vs VZ — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
QCOM leads in 3 of 6 categories
VZ leads 2 • FKWL leads 0 • SMSI leads 0 • CALX leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
QCOM leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
VZ is the larger business by revenue, generating $138.2B annually — 8147.1x SMSI's $17M. QCOM is the more profitable business, keeping 22.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to SMSI's -165.4%. On growth, CALX holds the edge at +27.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $40M | $17M | $1.1B | $44.5B | $138.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$2M | -$21M | $57M | $12.8B | $47.6B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $187,072 | -$28M | $34M | $9.9B | $17.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$9M | -$10M | $109M | $12.5B | $19.8B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +19.0% | +75.5% | +57.1% | +54.8% | +55.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -6.7% | -154.8% | +3.8% | +25.5% | +21.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +0.5% | -165.4% | +3.2% | +22.3% | +12.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -23.9% | -61.3% | +10.3% | +28.1% | +14.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -33.1% | -8.7% | +27.1% | -3.5% | +2.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +134.2% | +64.3% | +3.3% | +173.0% | -53.4% |
Valuation Metrics
VZ leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 11.6x trailing earnings, VZ trades at a 93% valuation discount to CALX's 167.4x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, VZ's 8.0x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than CALX's 69.6x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $41M | $17M | $2.8B | $213.5B | $198.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $27M | $18M | $2.7B | $222.0B | $380.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -167.96x | -0.58x | 167.38x | 40.43x | 11.60x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 24.33x | 18.84x | 9.54x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 19.44x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 69.62x | 15.91x | 7.99x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.88x | 1.00x | 2.81x | 4.82x | 1.44x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.08x | 0.94x | 3.57x | 10.56x | 1.88x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 22.51x | — | 24.34x | 16.65x | 9.87x |
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 $-142 for SMSI. CALX carries lower financial leverage with a 0.03x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to VZ's 1.90x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), FKWL scores 7/9 vs SMSI's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +0.5% | -141.9% | +4.2% | +40.2% | +16.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.4% | -104.4% | +3.5% | +18.4% | +4.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -8.6% | -48.3% | +2.1% | +29.1% | +8.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -7.5% | -62.8% | +2.5% | +28.9% | +8.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 3 | 6 | 6 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.04x | 0.13x | 0.03x | 0.77x | 1.90x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$13M | $844,000 | -$118M | $8.5B | $181.5B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $15M | $1M | $143M | $7.8B | $19.0B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1M | $2M | $26M | $16.4B | $200.6B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | -7.39x | — | 17.60x | 4.39x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
QCOM leads this category, winning 4 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 $207 for SMSI. 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 SMSI's -56.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -19.9% | +53.2% | -18.8% | +17.6% | +19.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -24.2% | -19.8% | +3.3% | +42.9% | +13.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -4.1% | -91.9% | +2.1% | +96.4% | +45.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -70.5% | -97.9% | -9.3% | +58.5% | +2.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +38.9% | -96.5% | +513.0% | +350.2% | +41.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -1.4% | -56.7% | +0.7% | +25.2% | +13.4% |
Risk & Volatility
VZ leads this category, winning 2 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 QCOM's 1.55 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. VZ currently trades 91.1% from its 52-week high vs CALX's 61.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -0.02x | 1.42x | 0.98x | 1.64x | -0.10x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $5.48 | $1.30 | $71.22 | $223.66 | $51.68 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $3.44 | $0.43 | $40.75 | $121.99 | $10.60 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +63.1% | +64.8% | +61.1% | +90.6% | +91.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 38.4 | 66.7 | 43.3 | 80.1 | 49.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 7K | 310K | 918K | 15.1M | 24.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — QCOM and VZ each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CALX as "Buy", QCOM as "Hold", VZ as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 40.2% upside for CALX (target: $61) vs -13.6% for QCOM (target: $175). For income investors, VZ offers the higher dividend yield at 5.76% vs QCOM's 1.70%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | — | Buy | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | — | $61.00 | $175.00 | $51.56 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | — | 21 | 69 | 60 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +4.4% | — | +1.7% | +5.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 1 | 1 | 23 | 11 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.04 | — | $3.44 | $2.71 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.0% | 0.0% | +3.3% | +4.1% | 0.0% |
QCOM leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). VZ leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Risk & Volatility). 1 tied.
FKWL vs SMSI vs CALX vs QCOM vs VZ: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is FKWL or SMSI or CALX or QCOM or VZ 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 -15. 5% for Smith Micro Software, Inc. (SMSI). 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 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 SMSI or CALX or QCOM or VZ?
On trailing P/E, Verizon Communications Inc.
(VZ) is the cheapest at 11. 6x versus Calix, Inc. at 167. 4x. On forward P/E, Verizon Communications Inc. is actually cheaper at 9. 5x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — FKWL or SMSI or CALX or QCOM or VZ?
Over the past 5 years, QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM) delivered a total return of +58.
5%, compared to -97. 9% for Smith Micro Software, Inc. (SMSI). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CALX returned +509. 0% versus SMSI's -96. 5%. 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 SMSI or CALX or QCOM or VZ?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Verizon Communications Inc.
(VZ) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 10β versus QUALCOMM Incorporated's 1. 64β — meaning QCOM is approximately -1745% more volatile than VZ relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Calix, Inc. (CALX) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 3% versus 190% for Verizon Communications Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — FKWL or SMSI or CALX or QCOM or VZ?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Franklin Wireless Corp.
(FKWL) is pulling ahead at 49. 6% versus -15. 5% for Smith Micro Software, Inc. (SMSI). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Calix, Inc. grew EPS 157. 8% 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.
06Which has better profit margins — FKWL or SMSI or CALX or QCOM or VZ?
QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM) is the more profitable company, earning 12.
5% net margin versus -173. 3% for Smith Micro Software, Inc. — 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 -110. 8% for SMSI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — SMSI leads at 74. 1%, 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 SMSI or CALX or QCOM or VZ more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Verizon Communications Inc.
(VZ) trades at 9. 5x forward P/E versus 24. 3x for Calix, Inc. — 14. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CALX: 40. 2% to $61. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — FKWL or SMSI or CALX or QCOM or VZ?
In this comparison, VZ (5.
8% yield), SMSI (4. 4% yield), QCOM (1. 7% yield) pay a dividend. FKWL, CALX do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is FKWL or SMSI or CALX or QCOM or VZ 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. 10), 5. 8% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (VZ: +41. 9%, SMSI: -96. 5%), 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 SMSI and CALX and QCOM and VZ?
These companies operate in different sectors (FKWL (Technology) and SMSI (Technology) and CALX (Technology) and QCOM (Technology) and VZ (Communication Services)), 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; SMSI is a small-cap income-oriented stock; CALX is a small-cap high-growth stock; QCOM is a large-cap quality compounder stock; VZ is a mid-cap deep-value stock. SMSI, QCOM, VZ pay a dividend while FKWL, CALX 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.