Telecommunications Services
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
FYBR vs WOW vs LUMN vs CABO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Telecommunications Services
Telecommunications Services
Telecommunications Services
FYBR vs WOW vs LUMN vs CABO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Telecommunications Services | Telecommunications Services | Telecommunications Services | Telecommunications Services |
| Market Cap | $9.64B | $446M | $8.71B | $345M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $6.11B | $591M | $12.12B | $1.47B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-381M | $-78M | $-1.74B | $-260M |
| Gross Margin | 65.1% | 61.0% | 35.2% | 39.0% |
| Operating Margin | 5.3% | 1.2% | -2.6% | 26.0% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | — | 2.6x |
| Total Debt | $12.03B | $1.04B | $17.71B | $3.19B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $806M | $39M | $1.00B | $153M |
FYBR vs WOW vs LUMN vs CABO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 21 | Jan 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Frontier Communicat… (FYBR) | 100 | 154.1 | +54.1% |
| WideOpenWest, Inc. (WOW) | 100 | 31.1 | -68.9% |
| Lumen Technologies,… (LUMN) | 100 | 56.1 | -43.9% |
| Cable One, Inc. (CABO) | 100 | 6.2 | -93.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: FYBR vs WOW vs LUMN vs CABO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
FYBR carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 3.2%, EPS growth -11.8%, 3Y rev CAGR -2.5%
- 42.8% 10Y total return vs LUMN's -35.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.06, current ratio 0.55x
- 3.2% revenue growth vs WOW's -8.1%
WOW lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
LUMN is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +100.0% vs CABO's -65.2%
CABO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and defensive is your priority.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.42, yield 5.0%
- Beta 0.42, yield 5.0%, current ratio 0.40x
- Better valuation composite
- 5.0% yield, vs LUMN's 0.0%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 3.2% revenue growth vs WOW's -8.1% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | -6.2% margin vs CABO's -17.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.06 vs LUMN's 2.74 | |
| Dividends | 5.0% yield, vs LUMN's 0.0%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +100.0% vs CABO's -65.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -1.8% ROA vs LUMN's -5.3%, ROIC 1.7% vs -0.8% |
FYBR vs WOW vs LUMN vs CABO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
FYBR vs WOW vs LUMN vs CABO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
FYBR leads in 2 of 6 categories
CABO leads 2 • LUMN leads 1 • WOW leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FYBR leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LUMN is the larger business by revenue, generating $12.1B annually — 20.5x WOW's $591M. FYBR is the more profitable business, keeping -6.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CABO's -17.7%. On growth, FYBR holds the edge at +4.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $6.1B | $591M | $12.1B | $1.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $2.1B | $212M | $2.4B | $730M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$381M | -$78M | -$1.7B | -$260M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$1.4B | -$68M | $5.4B | -$167M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +65.1% | +61.0% | +35.2% | +39.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +5.3% | +1.2% | -2.6% | +26.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -6.2% | -13.2% | -14.3% | -17.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -23.2% | -11.6% | +44.9% | -11.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +4.1% | -8.9% | -8.9% | -7.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +9.1% | -59.3% | 0.0% | +12.3% |
Valuation Metrics
CABO leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, CABO's 4.6x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than FYBR's 10.5x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $9.6B | $446M | $8.7B | $345M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $20.9B | $1.4B | $25.4B | $3.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -29.61x | -7.22x | -4.83x | -0.96x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | 2.63x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 10.55x | 6.68x | 9.91x | 4.60x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.62x | 0.71x | 0.70x | 0.23x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.93x | 2.04x | — | 0.24x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 23.49x | 1.24x |
Profitability & Efficiency
CABO leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
FYBR delivers a -8.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-8 in annual profit, vs $-79 for LUMN. CABO carries lower financial leverage with a 2.23x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to WOW's 4.98x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), FYBR scores 5/9 vs CABO's 3/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -8.1% | -52.7% | -79.4% | -18.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -1.8% | -5.2% | -5.3% | -4.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +1.7% | +0.4% | -0.8% | +6.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +1.8% | +0.5% | -0.6% | +7.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 3 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 2.44x | 4.98x | — | 2.23x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $11.2B | $1.0B | $16.7B | $3.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $806M | $39M | $1.0B | $153M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $12.0B | $1.0B | $17.7B | $3.2B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.44x | 0.07x | -1.12x | 3.06x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LUMN leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in FYBR five years ago would be worth $14,855 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $605 for CABO. Over the past 12 months, LUMN leads with a +100.0% total return vs CABO's -65.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors LUMN at 54.4% vs CABO's -50.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +1.1% | — | +10.0% | -41.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +5.5% | +21.8% | +100.0% | -65.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +105.5% | -37.4% | +267.8% | -87.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +48.6% | -67.3% | -28.8% | -93.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +42.8% | -68.5% | -35.7% | -70.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +27.1% | -14.5% | +54.4% | -50.3% |
Risk & Volatility
FYBR leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
FYBR is the less volatile stock with a 0.06 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LUMN's 2.74 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FYBR currently trades 100.0% from its 52-week high vs CABO's 32.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.06x | 0.87x | 2.74x | 0.42x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $38.50 | $5.25 | $11.95 | $186.54 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $36.04 | $3.06 | $3.37 | $53.94 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +100.0% | +99.0% | +70.8% | +32.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 72.8 | 58.7 | 73.4 | 23.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 0 | 573K | 12.5M | 151K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — WOW and CABO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: FYBR as "Buy", WOW as "Hold", LUMN as "Hold", CABO as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 31.6% upside for CABO (target: $80) vs -16.3% for LUMN (target: $7). CABO is the only dividend payer here at 5.03% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $34.33 | — | $7.08 | $80.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 11 | 15 | 28 | 14 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +0.0% | +5.0% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $0.00 | $3.06 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.7% | +0.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
FYBR leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Risk & Volatility). CABO leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). 1 tied.
FYBR vs WOW vs LUMN vs CABO: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is FYBR or WOW or LUMN or CABO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Frontier Communications Parent, Inc.
(FYBR) is the stronger pick with 3. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -8. 1% for WideOpenWest, Inc. (WOW). Analysts rate Frontier Communications Parent, Inc. (FYBR) a "Buy" — based on 11 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 — FYBR or WOW or LUMN or CABO?
Over the past 5 years, Frontier Communications Parent, Inc.
(FYBR) delivered a total return of +48. 6%, compared to -93. 9% for Cable One, Inc. (CABO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: FYBR returned +42. 8% versus CABO's -70. 3%. 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 — FYBR or WOW or LUMN or CABO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Frontier Communications Parent, Inc.
(FYBR) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 06β versus Lumen Technologies, Inc. 's 2. 74β — meaning LUMN is approximately 4157% more volatile than FYBR relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Cable One, Inc. (CABO) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 5% for WideOpenWest, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — FYBR or WOW or LUMN or CABO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Frontier Communications Parent, Inc.
(FYBR) is pulling ahead at 3. 2% versus -8. 1% for WideOpenWest, Inc. (WOW). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: WideOpenWest, Inc. grew EPS 79. 6% year-over-year, compared to -30. 4% for Lumen Technologies, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, FYBR leads at -2. 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 — FYBR or WOW or LUMN or CABO?
Frontier Communications Parent, Inc.
(FYBR) is the more profitable company, earning -5. 4% net margin versus -23. 7% for Cable One, Inc. — meaning it keeps -5. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CABO leads at 26. 5% versus -1. 5% for LUMN. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FYBR leads at 64. 5%, 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.
06Is FYBR or WOW or LUMN or CABO more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CABO: 31.
6% to $80. 00.
07Which pays a better dividend — FYBR or WOW or LUMN or CABO?
In this comparison, CABO (5.
0% yield) pays a dividend. FYBR, WOW, LUMN do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
08Is FYBR or WOW or LUMN or CABO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Cable One, Inc.
(CABO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 42), 5. 0% yield). Lumen Technologies, Inc. (LUMN) carries a higher beta of 2. 74 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (CABO: -70. 3%, LUMN: -35. 7%), 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.
09What are the main differences between FYBR and WOW and LUMN and CABO?
Both stocks operate in the Communication Services sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: FYBR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; WOW is a small-cap quality compounder stock; LUMN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CABO is a small-cap income-oriented stock. CABO pays a dividend while FYBR, WOW, LUMN 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.
- Sector: Communication Services
- Market Cap > $100B
- Gross Margin > 23%
- Dividend Yield > 2.0%
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.