Hardware, Equipment & Parts
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
HOLO vs NVDA vs QCOM vs MSFT vs AAPL
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Semiconductors
Semiconductors
Software - Infrastructure
Consumer Electronics
HOLO vs NVDA vs QCOM vs MSFT vs AAPL — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Hardware, Equipment & Parts | Semiconductors | Semiconductors | Software - Infrastructure | Consumer Electronics |
| Market Cap | $3M | $5.23T | $230.92B | $3.08T | $4.31T |
| Revenue (TTM) | $321M | $215.94B | $44.49B | $318.27B | $451.44B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $295M | $120.07B | $9.92B | $125.22B | $122.58B |
| Gross Margin | 24.2% | 71.1% | 54.8% | 68.3% | 47.9% |
| Operating Margin | -1.1% | 60.4% | 25.5% | 46.8% | 32.6% |
| Forward P/E | — | 26.0x | 20.4x | 24.8x | 33.7x |
| Total Debt | $8M | $11.41B | $16.37B | $112.18B | $112.38B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $851M | $10.61B | $7.84B | $30.24B | $35.93B |
HOLO vs NVDA vs QCOM vs MSFT vs AAPL — 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% |
| NVIDIA Corporation (NVDA) | 100 | 961.2 | +861.2% |
| QUALCOMM Incorporat… (QCOM) | 100 | 149.4 | +49.4% |
| Microsoft Corporati… (MSFT) | 100 | 137.5 | +37.5% |
| Apple Inc. (AAPL) | 100 | 193.1 | +93.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: HOLO vs NVDA vs QCOM vs MSFT vs AAPL
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 quality.
- 91.9% margin vs QCOM's 22.3%
NVDA carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 65.5%, EPS growth 66.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 100.0%
- 243.2% 10Y total return vs AAPL's 12.0%
- PEG 0.27 vs QCOM's 9.80
- 65.5% revenue growth vs AAPL's 6.4%
QCOM is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability is your priority.
- Dividend streak 23 yrs, beta 1.64, yield 1.6%
- Lower P/E (20.4x vs 33.7x)
- 1.6% yield, 23-year raise streak, vs NVDA's 0.0%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
MSFT is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.85, Low D/E 32.7%, current ratio 1.35x
- Beta 0.85, yield 0.8%, current ratio 1.35x
- Beta 0.85 vs HOLO's 2.27
Among these 5 stocks, AAPL doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 65.5% revenue growth vs AAPL's 6.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (20.4x vs 33.7x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 91.9% margin vs QCOM's 22.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.85 vs HOLO's 2.27 | |
| Dividends | 1.6% yield, 23-year raise streak, vs NVDA's 0.0%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +83.4% vs HOLO's -77.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 58.1% ROA vs HOLO's 10.0%, ROIC 81.8% vs -27.3% |
HOLO vs NVDA vs QCOM vs MSFT vs AAPL — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
HOLO vs NVDA vs QCOM vs MSFT vs AAPL — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
NVDA leads in 3 of 6 categories
QCOM leads 1 • HOLO leads 0 • MSFT leads 0 • AAPL leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NVDA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AAPL is the larger business by revenue, generating $451.4B annually — 1405.4x HOLO's $321M. HOLO is the more profitable business, keeping 91.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to QCOM's 22.3%. On growth, NVDA holds the edge at +73.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $321M | $215.9B | $44.5B | $318.3B | $451.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$3M | $133.2B | $12.8B | $192.6B | $160.0B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $295M | $120.1B | $9.9B | $125.2B | $122.6B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $47M | $96.7B | $12.5B | $72.9B | $129.2B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +24.2% | +71.1% | +54.8% | +68.3% | +47.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -1.1% | +60.4% | +25.5% | +46.8% | +32.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +91.9% | +55.6% | +22.3% | +39.3% | +27.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +14.7% | +44.8% | +28.1% | +22.9% | +28.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +24.0% | +73.2% | -3.5% | +18.3% | +16.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +153.4% | +97.8% | +173.0% | +23.4% | +21.8% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — HOLO and QCOM each lead in 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 30.4x trailing earnings, MSFT trades at a 31% valuation discount to NVDA's 43.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), NVDA offers better value at 0.46x vs QCOM's 21.03x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $3M | $5.23T | $230.9B | $3.08T | $4.31T |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | -$121M | $5.23T | $239.5B | $3.17T | $4.38T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.27x | 43.92x | 43.73x | 30.43x | 39.31x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 26.00x | 20.37x | 24.77x | 33.71x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.46x | 21.03x | 1.62x | 2.20x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 39.27x | 17.16x | 19.46x | 30.27x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.06x | 24.22x | 5.21x | 10.94x | 10.35x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.01x | 33.43x | 11.42x | 9.02x | 59.68x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 54.10x | 18.01x | 43.06x | 43.59x |
Profitability & Efficiency
NVDA leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
AAPL delivers a 146.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $147 in annual profit, vs $10 for HOLO. HOLO carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to AAPL's 1.52x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), AAPL scores 8/9 vs HOLO's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +10.3% | +76.3% | +40.2% | +33.1% | +146.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +10.0% | +58.1% | +18.4% | +19.2% | +34.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -27.3% | +81.8% | +29.1% | +24.9% | +67.4% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -16.0% | +97.2% | +28.9% | +29.7% | +69.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 4 | 6 | 6 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.00x | 0.07x | 0.77x | 0.33x | 1.52x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$844M | $807M | $8.5B | $81.9B | $76.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $851M | $10.6B | $7.8B | $30.2B | $35.9B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $8M | $11.4B | $16.4B | $112.2B | $112.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 545.03x | 17.60x | 55.65x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
NVDA leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in NVDA five years ago would be worth $150,908 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $0 for HOLO. Over the past 12 months, NVDA leads with a +83.4% total return vs HOLO's -77.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NVDA at 94.7% vs HOLO's -95.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -36.8% | +14.0% | +27.2% | -12.0% | +8.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -77.4% | +83.4% | +53.4% | -4.5% | +49.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | +638.6% | +111.7% | +37.6% | +70.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | +1409.1% | +82.3% | +73.8% | +134.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | +24324.1% | +382.4% | +776.0% | +1199.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -95.0% | +94.7% | +28.4% | +11.2% | +19.5% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MSFT and AAPL 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 HOLO's 2.27 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. AAPL currently trades 99.5% 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 | 1.74x | 1.64x | 0.85x | 1.04x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $11.82 | $217.80 | $228.04 | $555.45 | $294.76 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.54 | $115.21 | $121.99 | $356.28 | $193.46 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +14.8% | +98.8% | +96.1% | +74.7% | +99.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 41.7 | 63.4 | 82.6 | 57.9 | 69.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 720K | 160.0M | 15.6M | 32.5M | 40.0M |
Analyst Outlook
QCOM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NVDA as "Buy", QCOM as "Hold", MSFT as "Buy", AAPL as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 34.2% upside for MSFT (target: $557) vs -15.3% for QCOM (target: $186). For income investors, QCOM offers the higher dividend yield at 1.57% vs AAPL's 0.35%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $275.74 | $185.56 | $556.88 | $319.44 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 79 | 69 | 81 | 110 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.0% | +1.6% | +0.8% | +0.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 2 | 23 | 19 | 14 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.04 | $3.44 | $3.23 | $1.03 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.8% | +3.8% | +0.6% | +2.1% |
NVDA leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). QCOM leads in 1 (Analyst Outlook). 2 tied.
HOLO vs NVDA vs QCOM vs MSFT vs AAPL: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is HOLO or NVDA or QCOM or MSFT or AAPL a better buy right now?
For growth investors, NVIDIA Corporation (NVDA) is the stronger pick with 65.
5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 6. 4% for Apple Inc. (AAPL). 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 NVIDIA Corporation (NVDA) a "Buy" — based on 79 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 NVDA or QCOM or MSFT or AAPL?
On trailing P/E, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the cheapest at 30.
4x versus NVIDIA Corporation at 43. 9x. 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: NVIDIA Corporation wins at 0. 27x versus QUALCOMM Incorporated's 9. 80x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — HOLO or NVDA or QCOM or MSFT or AAPL?
Over the past 5 years, NVIDIA Corporation (NVDA) delivered a total return of +1409%, compared to -100.
0% for MicroCloud Hologram Inc. (HOLO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NVDA returned +243. 2% 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 NVDA or QCOM or MSFT or AAPL?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
85β versus MicroCloud Hologram Inc. 's 2. 27β — meaning HOLO is approximately 166% 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 152% for Apple Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — HOLO or NVDA or QCOM or MSFT or AAPL?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), NVIDIA Corporation (NVDA) is pulling ahead at 65.
5% versus 6. 4% for Apple Inc. (AAPL). 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, NVDA leads at 100. 0% 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 NVDA or QCOM or MSFT or AAPL?
NVIDIA Corporation (NVDA) is the more profitable company, earning 55.
6% net margin versus -21. 8% for MicroCloud Hologram Inc. — meaning it keeps 55. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NVDA leads at 60. 4% versus -47. 6% for HOLO. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NVDA leads at 71. 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 HOLO or NVDA or QCOM or MSFT or AAPL 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, NVIDIA Corporation (NVDA) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 27x versus QUALCOMM Incorporated's 9. 80x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM) trades at 20. 4x forward P/E versus 33. 7x for Apple Inc. — 13. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MSFT: 34. 2% to $556. 88.
08Which pays a better dividend — HOLO or NVDA or QCOM or MSFT or AAPL?
In this comparison, QCOM (1.
6% yield), MSFT (0. 8% yield), AAPL (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. HOLO, NVDA do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is HOLO or NVDA or QCOM or MSFT or AAPL 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 NVDA and QCOM and MSFT and AAPL?
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; NVDA is a mega-cap high-growth stock; QCOM is a large-cap quality compounder stock; MSFT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; AAPL is a mega-cap quality compounder stock. QCOM, MSFT pay a dividend while HOLO, NVDA, AAPL 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.