Software - Application
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
IMMR vs ACTG vs PXLW vs FORM vs VRNS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Specialty Business Services
Semiconductors
Semiconductors
Software - Infrastructure
IMMR vs ACTG vs PXLW vs FORM vs VRNS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Software - Application | Specialty Business Services | Semiconductors | Semiconductors | Software - Infrastructure |
| Market Cap | $211M | $454M | $36M | $11.28B | $3.37B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.47B | $215M | $693K | $840M | $660M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $66M | $-18M | $-8M | $68M | $-137M |
| Gross Margin | 27.8% | 104.9% | 85.0% | 42.1% | 78.1% |
| Operating Margin | 9.1% | -18.7% | -16.7% | 12.7% | -21.9% |
| Forward P/E | 15.5x | 21.4x | — | 66.5x | 242.2x |
| Total Debt | $322M | $100M | $298K | $45M | $572M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $78M | $307M | $11M | $103M | $202M |
IMMR vs ACTG vs PXLW vs FORM vs VRNS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Immersion Corporati… (IMMR) | 100 | 96.0 | -4.0% |
| Acacia Research Cor… (ACTG) | 100 | 181.7 | +81.7% |
| Pixelworks, Inc. (PXLW) | 100 | 13.0 | -87.0% |
| FormFactor, Inc. (FORM) | 100 | 574.8 | +474.8% |
| Varonis Systems, In… (VRNS) | 100 | 102.0 | +2.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: IMMR vs ACTG vs PXLW vs FORM vs VRNS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
IMMR carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 3 yrs, beta 1.52, yield 6.0%
- Rev growth 35.4%, EPS growth 295.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 227.7%
- 35.4% revenue growth vs PXLW's -98.4%
- Lower P/E (15.5x vs 242.2x)
ACTG ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.76, Low D/E 17.2%, current ratio 9.18x
- Beta 0.76, current ratio 9.18x
- Beta 0.76 vs FORM's 2.02
PXLW lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
FORM is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 19.5% 10Y total return vs IMMR's 13.3%
- 8.1% margin vs PXLW's -11.9%
- +387.8% vs VRNS's -36.7%
- 5.6% ROA vs PXLW's -15.6%, ROIC 5.4% vs -106.5%
Among these 5 stocks, VRNS doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 35.4% revenue growth vs PXLW's -98.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (15.5x vs 242.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 8.1% margin vs PXLW's -11.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.76 vs FORM's 2.02 | |
| Dividends | 6.0% yield; 3-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +387.8% vs VRNS's -36.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 5.6% ROA vs PXLW's -15.6%, ROIC 5.4% vs -106.5% |
IMMR vs ACTG vs PXLW vs FORM vs VRNS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
IMMR vs ACTG vs PXLW vs FORM vs VRNS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
IMMR leads in 3 of 6 categories
FORM leads 1 • ACTG leads 0 • PXLW leads 0 • VRNS leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — ACTG and FORM each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
IMMR is the larger business by revenue, generating $1.5B annually — 2123.8x PXLW's $693,000. FORM is the more profitable business, keeping 8.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PXLW's -11.9%. On growth, IMMR holds the edge at +5.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.5B | $215M | $693,000 | $840M | $660M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $166M | -$8M | -$10M | $152M | -$135M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $66M | -$18M | -$8M | $68M | -$137M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$69M | $52M | -$21M | -$5M | $120M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +27.8% | +104.9% | +85.0% | +42.1% | +78.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +9.1% | -18.7% | -16.7% | +12.7% | -21.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +4.5% | -8.5% | -11.9% | +8.1% | -20.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -4.7% | +24.4% | -30.4% | -0.6% | +18.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +5.4% | -56.4% | -3.6% | +32.0% | +26.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -137.3% | -164.0% | +24.4% | +2.2% | 0.0% |
Valuation Metrics
IMMR leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 1.6x trailing earnings, IMMR trades at a 99% valuation discount to FORM's 209.7x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, IMMR's 3.0x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than FORM's 100.9x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $211M | $454M | $36M | $11.3B | $3.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $455M | $248M | $25M | $11.2B | $3.7B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 1.58x | 21.39x | -3.74x | 209.68x | -25.38x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 15.49x | — | — | 66.48x | 242.23x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 2.95x | 4.98x | — | 100.94x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.17x | 1.59x | 51.30x | 14.37x | 5.40x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.38x | 0.78x | 4.12x | 10.94x | 6.19x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 7.75x | — | 960.69x | 24.99x |
Profitability & Efficiency
IMMR leads this category, winning 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
IMMR delivers a 13.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $13 in annual profit, vs $-34 for PXLW. PXLW carries lower financial leverage with a 0.04x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to VRNS's 0.96x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ACTG scores 9/9 vs IMMR's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +13.0% | -3.2% | -33.9% | +6.7% | -27.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +5.3% | -2.4% | -15.6% | +5.6% | -8.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +21.2% | +1.2% | -106.5% | +5.4% | -11.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +25.8% | +0.9% | -26.6% | +6.1% | -14.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 9 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.57x | 0.17x | 0.04x | 0.04x | 0.96x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $244M | -$206M | -$11M | -$58M | $369M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $78M | $307M | $11M | $103M | $202M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $322M | $100M | $298,000 | $45M | $572M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 12.24x | -5.51x | -886.45x | 252.69x | -9.01x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
FORM leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in FORM five years ago would be worth $37,395 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,396 for PXLW. Over the past 12 months, FORM leads with a +387.8% total return vs VRNS's -36.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors FORM at 72.9% vs PXLW's -30.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +3.6% | +25.8% | -18.0% | +144.4% | -10.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -6.1% | +53.3% | -8.3% | +387.8% | -36.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +3.4% | +19.7% | -66.6% | +417.3% | +23.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -6.1% | -20.9% | -86.0% | +273.9% | -39.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +13.3% | +2.5% | -73.6% | +1952.2% | +317.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +1.1% | +6.2% | -30.6% | +72.9% | +7.3% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ACTG and FORM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ACTG is the less volatile stock with a 0.76 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than FORM's 2.02 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FORM currently trades 90.9% from its 52-week high vs PXLW's 36.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.52x | 0.76x | 1.83x | 2.02x | 0.95x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $8.15 | $5.27 | $15.42 | $159.09 | $63.90 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $5.25 | $3.03 | $4.67 | $26.08 | $19.70 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +79.6% | +89.3% | +36.4% | +90.9% | +44.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 61.0 | 57.4 | 52.9 | 66.5 | 66.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 518K | 343K | 43K | 1.6M | 2.3M |
Analyst Outlook
IMMR leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: IMMR as "Buy", ACTG as "Buy", PXLW as "Buy", FORM as "Hold", VRNS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 167.4% upside for PXLW (target: $15) vs -14.7% for FORM (target: $123). IMMR is the only dividend payer here at 5.98% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $10.00 | — | $15.00 | $123.38 | $36.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 15 | 7 | 7 | 19 | 34 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +6.0% | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 3 | 0 | — | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.39 | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.1% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.2% | +3.4% |
IMMR leads in 3 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). FORM leads in 1 (Total Returns). 2 tied.
IMMR vs ACTG vs PXLW vs FORM vs VRNS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is IMMR or ACTG or PXLW or FORM or VRNS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Immersion Corporation (IMMR) is the stronger pick with 35.
4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -98. 4% for Pixelworks, Inc. (PXLW). Immersion Corporation (IMMR) offers the better valuation at 1. 6x trailing P/E (15. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Immersion Corporation (IMMR) a "Buy" — based on 15 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 — IMMR or ACTG or PXLW or FORM or VRNS?
On trailing P/E, Immersion Corporation (IMMR) is the cheapest at 1.
6x versus FormFactor, Inc. at 209. 7x. On forward P/E, Immersion Corporation is actually cheaper at 15. 5x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — IMMR or ACTG or PXLW or FORM or VRNS?
Over the past 5 years, FormFactor, Inc.
(FORM) delivered a total return of +273. 9%, compared to -86. 0% for Pixelworks, Inc. (PXLW). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: FORM returned +1952% versus PXLW's -73. 6%. 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 — IMMR or ACTG or PXLW or FORM or VRNS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Acacia Research Corporation (ACTG) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
76β versus FormFactor, Inc. 's 2. 02β — meaning FORM is approximately 168% more volatile than ACTG relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Pixelworks, Inc. (PXLW) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 4% versus 96% for Varonis Systems, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — IMMR or ACTG or PXLW or FORM or VRNS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Immersion Corporation (IMMR) is pulling ahead at 35.
4% versus -98. 4% for Pixelworks, Inc. (PXLW). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Immersion Corporation grew EPS 295. 2% year-over-year, compared to -31. 4% for Varonis Systems, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, IMMR leads at 227. 7% 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 — IMMR or ACTG or PXLW or FORM or VRNS?
Acacia Research Corporation (ACTG) is the more profitable company, earning 7.
6% net margin versus -1190. 3% for Pixelworks, Inc. — meaning it keeps 7. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: IMMR leads at 10. 7% versus -1667. 5% for PXLW. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — PXLW leads at 85. 0%, 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 IMMR or ACTG or PXLW or FORM or VRNS more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Immersion Corporation (IMMR) trades at 15.
5x forward P/E versus 242. 2x for Varonis Systems, Inc. — 226. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PXLW: 167. 4% to $15. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — IMMR or ACTG or PXLW or FORM or VRNS?
In this comparison, IMMR (6.
0% yield) pays a dividend. ACTG, PXLW, FORM, VRNS do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is IMMR or ACTG or PXLW or FORM or VRNS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Varonis Systems, Inc.
(VRNS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 95), +317. 5% 10Y return). Pixelworks, Inc. (PXLW) carries a higher beta of 1. 83 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (VRNS: +317. 5%, PXLW: -73. 6%), 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 IMMR and ACTG and PXLW and FORM and VRNS?
These companies operate in different sectors (IMMR (Technology) and ACTG (Industrials) and PXLW (Technology) and FORM (Technology) and VRNS (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: IMMR is a small-cap high-growth stock; ACTG is a small-cap high-growth stock; PXLW is a small-cap quality compounder stock; FORM is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; VRNS is a small-cap quality compounder stock. IMMR pays a dividend while ACTG, PXLW, FORM, VRNS 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.