Software - Application
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
FUSE vs AEYE vs KO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Software - Application
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
FUSE vs AEYE vs KO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Software - Application | Software - Application | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $37M | $84M | $342.09B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $10M | $41M | $49.28B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $262K | $-4M | $13.70B |
| Gross Margin | 54.8% | 78.0% | 61.7% |
| Operating Margin | -89.5% | -6.8% | 29.3% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 24.3x |
| Total Debt | $1M | $13M | $45.49B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $4M | $5M | $10.27B |
FUSE vs AEYE vs KO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Mar 22 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fusemachines Inc. (FUSE) | 100 | 13.1 | -86.9% |
| AudioEye, Inc. (AEYE) | 100 | 98.2 | -1.8% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 128.2 | +28.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: FUSE vs AEYE vs KO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
FUSE is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- beta 1.39
- Lower volatility, beta 1.39, current ratio 0.31x
- Beta 1.39, current ratio 0.31x
AEYE is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 14.5%, EPS growth 30.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 10.5%
- 14.5% revenue growth vs FUSE's -98.6%
- Better valuation composite
KO carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding.
- 112.9% 10Y total return vs AEYE's 67.3%
- 27.8% margin vs AEYE's -9.0%
- 2.6% yield; 56-year raise streak; the other 2 pay no meaningful dividend
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 14.5% revenue growth vs FUSE's -98.6% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs AEYE's -9.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.39 vs AEYE's 2.25 | |
| Dividends | 2.6% yield; 56-year raise streak; the other 2 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +15.0% vs FUSE's -89.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.1% ROA vs AEYE's -11.3%, ROIC 15.8% vs -20.1% |
FUSE vs AEYE vs KO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
FUSE vs AEYE vs KO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 3 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO is the larger business by revenue, generating $49.3B annually — 5137.5x FUSE's $10M. KO is the more profitable business, keeping 27.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to AEYE's -9.0%. On growth, KO holds the edge at +12.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $10M | $41M | $49.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$8M | $69,000 | $15.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $261,897 | -$4M | $13.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$8M | $6M | $12.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +54.8% | +78.0% | +61.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -89.5% | -6.8% | +29.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +2.7% | -9.0% | +27.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -82.3% | +14.6% | +25.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -3.8% | +8.4% | +12.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -41.7% | +18.2% |
Valuation Metrics
AEYE leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, KO's 25.5x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than AEYE's 236.4x.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $37M | $84M | $342.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $34M | $91M | $377.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -15.90x | -26.76x | 26.14x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 24.31x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 2.34x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 236.42x | 25.47x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 4.80x | 2.07x | 7.14x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 17.29x | 10.00x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 17.79x | 64.59x |
Profitability & Efficiency
KO leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
KO delivers a 41.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $41 in annual profit, vs $-71 for AEYE. KO carries lower financial leverage with a 1.33x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to AEYE's 2.75x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), KO scores 7/9 vs FUSE's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | -71.0% | +41.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.4% | -11.3% | +13.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | -20.1% | +15.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -2.5% | -17.7% | +17.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 4 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 2.75x | 1.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$3M | $8M | $35.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $4M | $5M | $10.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1M | $13M | $45.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -0.49x | -11.14x | 10.70x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
KO leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in KO five years ago would be worth $15,855 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,314 for FUSE. Over the past 12 months, KO leads with a +15.0% total return vs FUSE's -89.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors KO at 12.0% vs FUSE's -50.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -24.7% | -32.8% | +15.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -89.1% | -45.7% | +15.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -87.8% | +12.8% | +40.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -86.9% | -65.9% | +58.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -86.9% | +67.3% | +112.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -50.4% | +4.1% | +12.0% |
Risk & Volatility
KO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
KO is the less volatile stock with a -0.15 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than AEYE's 2.25 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. KO currently trades 96.1% from its 52-week high vs FUSE's 5.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.39x | 2.25x | -0.15x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $25.00 | $16.39 | $82.66 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.80 | $5.31 | $65.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +5.1% | +40.8% | +96.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 41.0 | 46.8 | 37.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 2.8M | 148K | 12.7M |
Analyst Outlook
KO leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
KO is the only dividend payer here at 2.56% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | — | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | — | $86.29 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | — | 48 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +2.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 1 | 56 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $2.04 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +5.5% | +0.2% |
KO leads in 5 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). AEYE leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics).
FUSE vs AEYE vs KO: Key Questions Answered
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is FUSE or AEYE or KO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, AudioEye, Inc.
(AEYE) is the stronger pick with 14. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -98. 6% for Fusemachines Inc. (FUSE). The Coca-Cola Company (KO) offers the better valuation at 26. 1x trailing P/E (24. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate The Coca-Cola Company (KO) a "Buy" — based on 48 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 — FUSE or AEYE or KO?
Over the past 5 years, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) delivered a total return of +58.
5%, compared to -86. 9% for Fusemachines Inc. (FUSE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: KO returned +112. 9% versus FUSE's -86. 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 — FUSE or AEYE or KO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
15β versus AudioEye, Inc. 's 2. 25β — meaning AEYE is approximately -1624% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 133% versus 3% for AudioEye, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — FUSE or AEYE or KO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), AudioEye, Inc.
(AEYE) is pulling ahead at 14. 5% versus -98. 6% for Fusemachines Inc. (FUSE). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Fusemachines Inc. grew EPS 86. 1% year-over-year, compared to 23. 6% for The Coca-Cola Company. Over a 3-year CAGR, AEYE leads at 10. 5% 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 — FUSE or AEYE or KO?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus -12. 0% for Fusemachines Inc. — meaning it keeps 27. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: KO leads at 28. 7% versus -77. 2% for FUSE. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — AEYE leads at 78. 3%, 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 — FUSE or AEYE or KO?
In this comparison, KO (2.
6% yield) pays a dividend. FUSE, AEYE do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
07Is FUSE or AEYE or KO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
15), 2. 6% yield, +112. 9% 10Y return). AudioEye, Inc. (AEYE) carries a higher beta of 2. 25 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (KO: +112. 9%, AEYE: +67. 3%), 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 FUSE and AEYE and KO?
These companies operate in different sectors (FUSE (Technology) and AEYE (Technology) and KO (Consumer Defensive)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
KO pays a dividend while FUSE, AEYE 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.