Hardware, Equipment & Parts
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
HOLO vs MVIS vs VUZI vs MSFT vs QCOM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Hardware, Equipment & Parts
Consumer Electronics
Software - Infrastructure
Semiconductors
HOLO vs MVIS vs VUZI vs MSFT vs QCOM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Hardware, Equipment & Parts | Hardware, Equipment & Parts | Consumer Electronics | Software - Infrastructure | Semiconductors |
| Market Cap | $3M | $205M | $252M | $3.08T | $230.92B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $321M | $1M | $5M | $318.27B | $44.49B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $295M | $-95M | $-32.28B | $125.22B | $9.92B |
| Gross Margin | 24.2% | -14.4% | -0.0% | 68.3% | 54.8% |
| Operating Margin | -1.1% | -57.4% | -5.2% | 46.8% | 25.5% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | — | 24.8x | 20.4x |
| Total Debt | $8M | $37M | $1.00B | $112.18B | $16.37B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $851M | $32M | $21.15B | $30.24B | $7.84B |
HOLO vs MVIS vs VUZI vs MSFT vs QCOM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Aug 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| MicroCloud Hologram… (HOLO) | 100 | 0.0 | -100.0% |
| MicroVision, Inc. (MVIS) | 100 | 4.5 | -95.5% |
| Vuzix Corporation (VUZI) | 100 | 23.5 | -76.5% |
| Microsoft Corporati… (MSFT) | 100 | 137.5 | +37.5% |
| QUALCOMM Incorporat… (QCOM) | 100 | 149.4 | +49.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: HOLO vs MVIS vs VUZI vs MSFT vs QCOM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
HOLO ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 2.27, Low D/E 0.5%, current ratio 52.19x
- 91.9% margin vs MVIS's -78.6%
Among these 5 stocks, MVIS doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
VUZI carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 1.1K%, EPS growth 61.1%, 3Y rev CAGR 7.1%
- 1.1K% revenue growth vs MVIS's -74.3%
- 9.3% yield, 3-year raise streak, vs QCOM's 1.6%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
- +70.9% vs HOLO's -77.4%
MSFT is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding and valuation efficiency is your priority.
- 7.8% 10Y total return vs QCOM's 382.4%
- PEG 1.32 vs QCOM's 9.80
- Beta 0.85 vs VUZI's 3.49
- 19.2% ROA vs VUZI's -321.3%, ROIC 24.9% vs -10.7%
QCOM is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 23 yrs, beta 1.64, yield 1.6%
- Beta 1.64, yield 1.6%, current ratio 2.82x
- Better valuation composite
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 1.1K% revenue growth vs MVIS's -74.3% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 91.9% margin vs MVIS's -78.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.85 vs VUZI's 3.49 | |
| Dividends | 9.3% yield, 3-year raise streak, vs QCOM's 1.6%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +70.9% vs HOLO's -77.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 19.2% ROA vs VUZI's -321.3%, ROIC 24.9% vs -10.7% |
HOLO vs MVIS vs VUZI vs MSFT vs QCOM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
HOLO vs MVIS vs VUZI vs MSFT vs QCOM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MSFT leads in 1 of 6 categories
QCOM leads 1 • HOLO leads 0 • MVIS leads 0 • VUZI leads 0 • 4 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — MSFT and QCOM each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MSFT is the larger business by revenue, generating $318.3B annually — 263471.0x MVIS's $1M. HOLO is the more profitable business, keeping 91.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to MVIS's -78.6%. On growth, VUZI holds the edge at +4933.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $321M | $1M | $5M | $318.3B | $44.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$3M | -$64M | -$30.9B | $192.6B | $12.8B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $295M | -$95M | -$32.3B | $125.2B | $9.9B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $47M | -$59M | -$20.8B | $72.9B | $12.5B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +24.2% | -14.4% | -0.0% | +68.3% | +54.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -1.1% | -57.4% | -5.2% | +46.8% | +25.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +91.9% | -78.6% | -5.1% | +39.3% | +22.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +14.7% | -49.2% | -3.3% | +22.9% | +28.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +24.0% | -86.5% | +4933.1% | +18.3% | -3.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +153.4% | +14.3% | +25.0% | +23.4% | +173.0% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — VUZI and QCOM each lead in 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 30.4x trailing earnings, MSFT trades at a 30% valuation discount to QCOM's 43.7x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), MSFT offers better value at 1.62x vs QCOM's 21.03x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $3M | $205M | $252M | $3.08T | $230.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | -$121M | $209M | -$19.9B | $3.17T | $239.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.27x | -1.91x | -7.40x | 30.43x | 43.73x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | 24.77x | 20.37x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 1.62x | 21.03x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | 19.46x | 17.16x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.06x | 169.62x | 0.04x | 10.94x | 5.21x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.01x | 3.29x | 0.01x | 9.02x | 11.42x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | 43.06x | 18.01x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MSFT leads this category, winning 4 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 $-5 for VUZI. HOLO carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to QCOM's 0.77x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MSFT scores 6/9 vs VUZI's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +10.3% | -137.4% | -5.2% | +33.1% | +40.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +10.0% | -74.3% | -3.2% | +19.2% | +18.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -27.3% | -98.3% | -10.7% | +24.9% | +29.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -16.0% | -93.6% | -184.6% | +29.7% | +28.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.00x | 0.66x | 0.04x | 0.33x | 0.77x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$844M | $4M | -$20.1B | $81.9B | $8.5B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $851M | $32M | $21.2B | $30.2B | $7.8B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $8M | $37M | $1.0B | $112.2B | $16.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | -3.54x | — | 55.65x | 17.60x |
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 $18,229 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $0 for HOLO. Over the past 12 months, VUZI leads with a +70.9% total return vs HOLO's -77.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors QCOM at 28.4% vs HOLO's -95.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -36.8% | -24.9% | -19.2% | -12.0% | +27.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -77.4% | -41.9% | +70.9% | -4.5% | +53.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | -71.3% | -23.4% | +37.6% | +111.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | -95.2% | -82.0% | +73.8% | +82.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | -63.3% | -30.1% | +776.0% | +382.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -95.0% | -34.0% | -8.5% | +11.2% | +28.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MSFT and QCOM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MSFT is the less volatile stock with a 0.85 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than VUZI's 3.49 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. QCOM currently trades 96.1% from its 52-week high vs HOLO's 14.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.27x | 2.66x | 3.49x | 0.85x | 1.64x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $11.82 | $1.73 | $4.29 | $555.45 | $228.04 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.54 | $0.51 | $1.74 | $356.28 | $121.99 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +14.8% | +38.6% | +72.5% | +74.7% | +96.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 41.7 | 44.4 | 60.3 | 57.9 | 82.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 720K | 5.4M | 946K | 32.5M | 15.6M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — VUZI and QCOM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: MVIS as "Buy", VUZI as "Buy", MSFT as "Buy", QCOM as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 647.9% upside for MVIS (target: $5) vs -15.3% for QCOM (target: $186). For income investors, VUZI offers the higher dividend yield at 9.29% vs MSFT's 0.78%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $5.00 | $6.00 | $556.88 | $185.56 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 7 | 5 | 81 | 69 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +9.3% | +0.8% | +1.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 3 | 19 | 23 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $0.29 | $3.23 | $3.44 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.6% | +3.8% |
MSFT leads in 1 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency). QCOM leads in 1 (Total Returns). 4 tied.
HOLO vs MVIS vs VUZI vs MSFT vs QCOM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is HOLO or MVIS or VUZI or MSFT or QCOM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Vuzix Corporation (VUZI) is the stronger pick with 1090% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -74.
3% for MicroVision, Inc. (MVIS). Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) offers the better valuation at 30. 4x trailing P/E (24. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate MicroVision, Inc. (MVIS) a "Buy" — based on 7 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 — HOLO or MVIS or VUZI or MSFT or QCOM?
On trailing P/E, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the cheapest at 30.
4x versus QUALCOMM Incorporated at 43. 7x. On forward P/E, QUALCOMM Incorporated is actually cheaper at 20. 4x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Microsoft Corporation wins at 1. 32x versus QUALCOMM Incorporated's 9. 80x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — HOLO or MVIS or VUZI or MSFT or QCOM?
Over the past 5 years, QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM) delivered a total return of +82.
3%, compared to -100. 0% for MicroCloud Hologram Inc. (HOLO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MSFT returned +776. 0% versus HOLO's -100. 0%. 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 — HOLO or MVIS or VUZI or MSFT or QCOM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
85β versus Vuzix Corporation's 3. 49β — meaning VUZI is approximately 308% more volatile than MSFT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, MicroCloud Hologram Inc. (HOLO) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 77% for QUALCOMM Incorporated — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — HOLO or MVIS or VUZI or MSFT or QCOM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Vuzix Corporation (VUZI) is pulling ahead at 1090% versus -74.
3% for MicroVision, Inc. (MVIS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: MicroCloud Hologram Inc. grew EPS 94. 2% year-over-year, compared to -44. 2% for QUALCOMM Incorporated. Over a 3-year CAGR, VUZI leads at 709. 6% 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 — HOLO or MVIS or VUZI or MSFT or QCOM?
Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the more profitable company, earning 36.
1% net margin versus -78. 6% for MicroVision, Inc. — meaning it keeps 36. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MSFT leads at 45. 6% versus -57. 4% for MVIS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MSFT leads at 68. 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 HOLO or MVIS or VUZI or MSFT or QCOM 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, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 32x versus QUALCOMM Incorporated's 9. 80x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM) trades at 20. 4x forward P/E versus 24. 8x for Microsoft Corporation — 4. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MVIS: 647. 9% to $5. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — HOLO or MVIS or VUZI or MSFT or QCOM?
In this comparison, VUZI (9.
3% yield), QCOM (1. 6% yield), MSFT (0. 8% yield) pay a dividend. HOLO, MVIS do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is HOLO or MVIS or VUZI or MSFT or QCOM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
85), 0. 8% yield, +776. 0% 10Y return). MicroCloud Hologram Inc. (HOLO) carries a higher beta of 2. 27 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (MSFT: +776. 0%, HOLO: -100. 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 HOLO and MVIS and VUZI and MSFT and QCOM?
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: HOLO is a small-cap high-growth stock; MVIS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; VUZI is a small-cap high-growth stock; MSFT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; QCOM is a large-cap quality compounder stock. VUZI, MSFT, QCOM pay a dividend while HOLO, MVIS 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.