Hardware, Equipment & Parts
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
GRMN vs SONO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Consumer Electronics
GRMN vs SONO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Hardware, Equipment & Parts | Consumer Electronics |
| Market Cap | $46.83B | $1.78B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $7.46B | $1.46B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $1.74B | $-41M |
| Gross Margin | 59.1% | 44.8% |
| Operating Margin | 26.5% | 2.0% |
| Forward P/E | 25.5x | 46.9x |
| Total Debt | $165M | $60M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $2.28B | $175M |
GRMN vs SONO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Garmin Ltd. (GRMN) | 100 | 269.3 | +169.3% |
| Sonos, Inc. (SONO) | 100 | 135.9 | +35.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: GRMN vs SONO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
GRMN carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 1.30, yield 1.4%
- Rev growth 15.1%, EPS growth 17.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 14.2%
- 5.6% 10Y total return vs SONO's -25.9%
SONO is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +60.6% vs GRMN's +31.7%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 15.1% revenue growth vs SONO's -4.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (25.5x vs 46.9x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 23.3% margin vs SONO's -2.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.30 vs SONO's 1.75, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.4% yield; 2-year raise streak; the other pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +60.6% vs GRMN's +31.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 16.2% ROA vs SONO's -4.8%, ROIC 22.0% vs -13.4% |
GRMN vs SONO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
GRMN vs SONO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
GRMN leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
GRMN is the larger business by revenue, generating $7.5B annually — 5.1x SONO's $1.5B. GRMN is the more profitable business, keeping 23.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to SONO's -2.8%. On growth, GRMN holds the edge at +14.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $7.5B | $1.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $2.2B | $61M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $1.7B | -$41M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $1.5B | $118M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +59.1% | +44.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +26.5% | +2.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +23.3% | -2.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +19.4% | +8.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +14.2% | +8.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +21.5% | -29.3% |
Valuation Metrics
SONO leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, GRMN's 21.7x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than SONO's 140.8x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $46.8B | $1.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $44.7B | $1.7B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 28.27x | -28.94x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 25.55x | 46.86x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 2.64x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 21.66x | 140.81x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 6.46x | 1.24x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 5.24x | 5.02x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 34.36x | 16.49x |
Profitability & Efficiency
GRMN leads this category, winning 7 of 8 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
GRMN delivers a 19.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $20 in annual profit, vs $-10 for SONO. GRMN carries lower financial leverage with a 0.02x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to SONO's 0.17x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), GRMN scores 7/9 vs SONO's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +19.9% | -10.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +16.2% | -4.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +22.0% | -13.4% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +21.6% | -9.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.02x | 0.17x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$2.1B | -$115M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $2.3B | $175M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $165M | $60M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 2587.88x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
GRMN leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in GRMN five years ago would be worth $18,250 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,927 for SONO. Over the past 12 months, SONO leads with a +60.6% total return vs GRMN's +31.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors GRMN at 34.6% vs SONO's -12.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +20.4% | -15.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +31.7% | +60.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +143.7% | -32.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +82.5% | -60.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +558.3% | -25.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +34.6% | -12.1% |
Risk & Volatility
GRMN leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
GRMN is the less volatile stock with a 1.30 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than SONO's 1.75 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. GRMN currently trades 88.8% from its 52-week high vs SONO's 74.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.30x | 1.75x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $273.32 | $19.82 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $184.47 | $8.73 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +88.8% | +74.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 35.2 | 46.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 738K | 1.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates GRMN as "Hold" and SONO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 32.1% upside for SONO (target: $20) vs 10.8% for GRMN (target: $269). GRMN is the only dividend payer here at 1.41% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $269.00 | $19.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 28 | 9 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.4% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 2 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $3.43 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.5% | +4.5% |
GRMN leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). SONO leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics).
GRMN vs SONO: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is GRMN or SONO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Garmin Ltd.
(GRMN) is the stronger pick with 15. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -4. 9% for Sonos, Inc. (SONO). Garmin Ltd. (GRMN) offers the better valuation at 28. 3x trailing P/E (25. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Sonos, Inc. (SONO) a "Buy" — based on 9 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 — GRMN or SONO?
On forward P/E, Garmin Ltd.
is actually cheaper at 25. 5x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — GRMN or SONO?
Over the past 5 years, Garmin Ltd.
(GRMN) delivered a total return of +82. 5%, compared to -60. 7% for Sonos, Inc. (SONO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GRMN returned +558. 3% versus SONO's -25. 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 — GRMN or SONO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Garmin Ltd.
(GRMN) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 30β versus Sonos, Inc. 's 1. 75β — meaning SONO is approximately 34% more volatile than GRMN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Garmin Ltd. (GRMN) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 17% for Sonos, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — GRMN or SONO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Garmin Ltd.
(GRMN) is pulling ahead at 15. 1% versus -4. 9% for Sonos, Inc. (SONO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Garmin Ltd. grew EPS 17. 7% year-over-year, compared to -64. 5% for Sonos, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, GRMN leads at 14. 2% 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 — GRMN or SONO?
Garmin Ltd.
(GRMN) is the more profitable company, earning 23. 0% net margin versus -4. 2% for Sonos, Inc. — meaning it keeps 23. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: GRMN leads at 25. 9% versus -3. 5% for SONO. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — GRMN leads at 58. 7%, 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 GRMN or SONO more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Garmin Ltd.
(GRMN) trades at 25. 5x forward P/E versus 46. 9x for Sonos, Inc. — 21. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for SONO: 32. 1% to $19. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — GRMN or SONO?
In this comparison, GRMN (1.
4% yield) pays a dividend. SONO does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is GRMN or SONO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Garmin Ltd.
(GRMN) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (1. 4% yield, +558. 3% 10Y return). Sonos, Inc. (SONO) carries a higher beta of 1. 75 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (GRMN: +558. 3%, SONO: -25. 9%), 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 GRMN and SONO?
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: GRMN is a mid-cap high-growth stock; SONO is a small-cap quality compounder stock. GRMN pays a dividend while SONO 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.