Telecommunications Services
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
IDT vs LUMN vs OOMA vs FYBR vs T
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Telecommunications Services
Telecommunications Services
Telecommunications Services
Telecommunications Services
IDT vs LUMN vs OOMA vs FYBR vs T — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Telecommunications Services | Telecommunications Services | Telecommunications Services | Telecommunications Services | Telecommunications Services |
| Market Cap | $1.25B | $8.71B | $517M | $9.64B | $176.40B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.26B | $12.12B | $274M | $6.11B | $126.52B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $82M | $-1.74B | $6M | $-381M | $21.41B |
| Gross Margin | 36.9% | 35.2% | 61.1% | 65.1% | 79.7% |
| Operating Margin | 8.4% | -2.6% | 1.9% | 5.3% | 19.4% |
| Forward P/E | 14.1x | — | 14.8x | — | 10.9x |
| Total Debt | $2M | $17.71B | $17M | $12.03B | $173.99B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $227M | $1.00B | $20M | $806M | $18.23B |
IDT vs LUMN vs OOMA vs FYBR vs T — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| IDT Corporation (IDT) | 100 | 185.5 | +85.5% |
| Lumen Technologies,… (LUMN) | 100 | 61.1 | -38.9% |
| Ooma, Inc. (OOMA) | 100 | 97.9 | -2.1% |
| Frontier Communicat… (FYBR) | 100 | 152.4 | +52.4% |
| AT&T Inc. (T) | 100 | 113.7 | +13.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: IDT vs LUMN vs OOMA vs FYBR vs T
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
IDT is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.68, yield 0.4%
- 324.0% 10Y total return vs FYBR's 42.8%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.68, Low D/E 0.6%, current ratio 1.78x
- Beta 0.68, yield 0.4%, current ratio 1.78x
LUMN ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +100.0% vs T's -6.2%
OOMA is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 6.5%, EPS growth 188.5%, 3Y rev CAGR 8.2%
- 6.5% revenue growth vs LUMN's -5.4%
FYBR is the clearest fit if your priority is stability.
- Beta 0.06 vs LUMN's 2.74
T carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for value and quality.
- Better valuation composite
- 16.9% margin vs LUMN's -14.3%
- 4.5% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs IDT's 0.4%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 6.5% revenue growth vs LUMN's -5.4% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 16.9% margin vs LUMN's -14.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.06 vs LUMN's 2.74 | |
| Dividends | 4.5% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs IDT's 0.4%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +100.0% vs T's -6.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 12.8% ROA vs LUMN's -5.3%, ROIC 71.9% vs -0.8% |
IDT vs LUMN vs OOMA vs FYBR vs T — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
IDT vs LUMN vs OOMA vs FYBR vs T — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
T leads in 3 of 6 categories
IDT leads 1 • LUMN leads 1 • OOMA leads 0 • FYBR leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
T leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
T is the larger business by revenue, generating $126.5B annually — 462.4x OOMA's $274M. T is the more profitable business, keeping 16.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to LUMN's -14.3%. On growth, OOMA holds the edge at +14.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.3B | $12.1B | $274M | $6.1B | $126.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $128M | $2.4B | $20M | $2.1B | $45.1B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $82M | -$1.7B | $6M | -$381M | $21.4B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $98M | $5.4B | -$42M | -$1.4B | $10.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +36.9% | +35.2% | +61.1% | +65.1% | +79.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +8.4% | -2.6% | +1.9% | +5.3% | +19.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +6.5% | -14.3% | +2.4% | -6.2% | +16.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +7.8% | +44.9% | -15.3% | -23.2% | +8.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +5.7% | -8.9% | +14.6% | +4.1% | +2.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +3.8% | 0.0% | — | +9.1% | -11.5% |
Valuation Metrics
T leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 8.3x trailing earnings, T trades at a 90% valuation discount to OOMA's 82.6x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, T's 7.4x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than OOMA's 27.7x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.3B | $8.7B | $517M | $9.6B | $176.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.0B | $25.4B | $514M | $20.9B | $332.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 17.79x | -4.83x | 82.61x | -29.61x | 8.31x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 14.13x | — | 14.78x | — | 10.93x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.59x | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 8.45x | 9.91x | 27.66x | 10.55x | 7.37x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.02x | 0.70x | 1.89x | 1.62x | 1.40x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 4.10x | — | 5.69x | 1.93x | 1.41x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 11.77x | 23.49x | — | — | 9.07x |
Profitability & Efficiency
IDT leads this category, winning 8 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
IDT delivers a 24.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $24 in annual profit, vs $-79 for LUMN. IDT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to FYBR's 2.44x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), IDT scores 7/9 vs LUMN's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +24.1% | -79.4% | +7.2% | -8.1% | +16.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +12.8% | -5.3% | +3.8% | -1.8% | +5.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +71.9% | -0.8% | +3.7% | +1.7% | +6.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +33.3% | -0.6% | +3.4% | +1.8% | +6.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 4 | 6 | 5 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.01x | — | 0.19x | 2.44x | 1.35x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$225M | $16.7B | -$3M | $11.2B | $155.8B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $227M | $1.0B | $20M | $806M | $18.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $2M | $17.7B | $17M | $12.0B | $174.0B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | -1.12x | — | 0.44x | 4.97x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LUMN leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in IDT five years ago would be worth $21,927 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $7,119 for LUMN. Over the past 12 months, LUMN leads with a +100.0% total return vs T's -6.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors LUMN at 54.4% vs OOMA's 17.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +6.0% | +10.0% | +70.6% | +1.1% | +5.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +1.6% | +100.0% | +48.7% | +5.5% | -6.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +64.9% | +267.8% | +60.9% | +105.5% | +67.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +119.3% | -28.8% | +15.9% | +48.6% | +29.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +324.0% | -35.7% | +194.6% | +42.8% | +41.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +18.1% | +54.4% | +17.2% | +27.1% | +18.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — FYBR and T each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
T is the less volatile stock with a -0.26 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 LUMN's 70.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.68x | 2.74x | 1.01x | 0.06x | -0.26x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $71.12 | $11.95 | $19.26 | $38.50 | $29.79 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $45.72 | $3.37 | $9.79 | $36.04 | $22.95 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +75.3% | +70.8% | +98.7% | +100.0% | +84.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 60.6 | 73.4 | 82.2 | 72.8 | 38.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 136K | 12.5M | 266K | 0 | 33.7M |
Analyst Outlook
T leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: IDT as "Buy", LUMN as "Hold", OOMA as "Buy", FYBR as "Buy", T as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 16.5% upside for T (target: $29) vs -16.3% for LUMN (target: $7). For income investors, T offers the higher dividend yield at 4.51% vs IDT's 0.41%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $7.08 | $18.00 | $34.33 | $29.42 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 28 | 15 | 11 | 62 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.4% | +0.0% | — | — | +4.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.22 | $0.00 | — | — | $1.14 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.4% | 0.0% | +3.2% | +0.7% | +2.6% |
T leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). IDT leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 1 tied.
IDT vs LUMN vs OOMA vs FYBR vs T: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is IDT or LUMN or OOMA or FYBR or T a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Ooma, Inc.
(OOMA) is the stronger pick with 6. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -5. 4% for Lumen Technologies, Inc. (LUMN). AT&T Inc. (T) offers the better valuation at 8. 3x trailing P/E (10. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate IDT Corporation (IDT) a "Buy" — based on 2 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 — IDT or LUMN or OOMA or FYBR or T?
On trailing P/E, AT&T Inc.
(T) is the cheapest at 8. 3x versus Ooma, Inc. at 82. 6x. On forward P/E, AT&T Inc. is actually cheaper at 10. 9x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — IDT or LUMN or OOMA or FYBR or T?
Over the past 5 years, IDT Corporation (IDT) delivered a total return of +119.
3%, compared to -28. 8% for Lumen Technologies, Inc. (LUMN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IDT returned +324. 0% versus LUMN's -35. 7%. 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 — IDT or LUMN or OOMA or FYBR or T?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), AT&T Inc.
(T) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 26β versus Lumen Technologies, Inc. 's 2. 74β — meaning LUMN is approximately -1156% more volatile than T relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, IDT Corporation (IDT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 2% for Frontier Communications Parent, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — IDT or LUMN or OOMA or FYBR or T?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Ooma, Inc.
(OOMA) is pulling ahead at 6. 5% versus -5. 4% for Lumen Technologies, Inc. (LUMN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Ooma, Inc. grew EPS 188. 5% year-over-year, compared to -30. 4% for Lumen Technologies, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, OOMA leads at 8. 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 — IDT or LUMN or OOMA or FYBR or T?
AT&T Inc.
(T) is the more profitable company, earning 17. 4% net margin versus -14. 0% for Lumen Technologies, Inc. — meaning it keeps 17. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: T leads at 19. 2% versus -1. 5% for LUMN. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — T leads at 79. 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 IDT or LUMN or OOMA or FYBR or T more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, AT&T Inc.
(T) trades at 10. 9x forward P/E versus 14. 8x for Ooma, Inc. — 3. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for T: 16. 5% to $29. 42.
08Which pays a better dividend — IDT or LUMN or OOMA or FYBR or T?
In this comparison, T (4.
5% yield), IDT (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. LUMN, OOMA, FYBR do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is IDT or LUMN or OOMA or FYBR or T better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, AT&T Inc.
(T) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 26), 4. 5% 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 (T: +41. 9%, 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.
10What are the main differences between IDT and LUMN and OOMA and FYBR and T?
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: IDT is a small-cap deep-value stock; LUMN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; OOMA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; FYBR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; T is a mid-cap deep-value stock. T pays a dividend while IDT, LUMN, OOMA, FYBR 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
- Revenue Growth > 7%
- Gross Margin > 36%
- Sector: Communication Services
- Market Cap > $100B
- Net Margin > 10%
- Dividend Yield > 1.8%
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.