Telecommunications Services
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
LILA vs TKC vs AMX vs CSCO vs VIAV
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Telecommunications Services
Telecommunications Services
Communication Equipment
Communication Equipment
LILA vs TKC vs AMX vs CSCO vs VIAV — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Telecommunications Services | Telecommunications Services | Telecommunications Services | Communication Equipment | Communication Equipment |
| Market Cap | $1.56B | $5.69B | $80.49B | $364.95B | $11.81B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $4.44B | $212.60B | $939.71B | $59.05B | $1.37B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-498M | $15.65B | $82.51B | $11.08B | $-55M |
| Gross Margin | 50.8% | 27.6% | 42.9% | 64.4% | 55.7% |
| Operating Margin | 4.3% | 14.6% | 20.5% | 23.0% | 8.2% |
| Forward P/E | — | 0.2x | 0.8x | 22.2x | 55.2x |
| Total Debt | $9.22B | $104.34B | $918.75B | $29.64B | $692M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $14M | $68.93B | $35.01B | $9.47B | $424M |
LILA vs TKC vs AMX vs CSCO vs VIAV — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Liberty Latin Ameri… (LILA) | 100 | 78.3 | -21.7% |
| Turkcell Iletisim H… (TKC) | 100 | 126.1 | +26.1% |
| América Móvil, S.A.… (AMX) | 100 | 201.7 | +101.7% |
| Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) | 100 | 192.7 | +92.7% |
| Viavi Solutions Inc. (VIAV) | 100 | 440.5 | +340.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LILA vs TKC vs AMX vs CSCO vs VIAV
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, LILA doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
TKC carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 3 yrs, beta 0.60, yield 2.8%
- Rev growth 55.6%, EPS growth 87.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 15.3%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.60, Low D/E 55.8%, current ratio 1.25x
- PEG 0.00 vs VIAV's 12.09
AMX ranks third and is worth considering specifically for stability.
- Beta 0.50 vs VIAV's 1.54
CSCO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if quality and efficiency is your priority.
- 18.8% margin vs LILA's -11.2%
- 9.0% ROA vs LILA's -5.5%, ROIC 13.0% vs 5.6%
VIAV is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 7.2% 10Y total return vs AMX's 313.1%
- +466.6% vs TKC's +18.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 55.6% revenue growth vs LILA's -0.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (0.2x vs 55.2x), PEG 0.00 vs 12.09 | |
| Quality / Margins | 18.8% margin vs LILA's -11.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.50 vs VIAV's 1.54 | |
| Dividends | 2.8% yield, 3-year raise streak, vs CSCO's 1.7%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +466.6% vs TKC's +18.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 9.0% ROA vs LILA's -5.5%, ROIC 13.0% vs 5.6% |
LILA vs TKC vs AMX vs CSCO vs VIAV — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
LILA vs TKC vs AMX vs CSCO vs VIAV — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CSCO leads in 2 of 6 categories
TKC leads 1 • VIAV leads 1 • LILA leads 0 • AMX leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CSCO leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AMX is the larger business by revenue, generating $939.7B annually — 688.1x VIAV's $1.4B. CSCO is the more profitable business, keeping 18.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to LILA's -11.2%. On growth, TKC holds the edge at +48.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $4.4B | $212.6B | $939.7B | $59.1B | $1.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $1.1B | $90.8B | $372.8B | $16.1B | $207M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$498M | $15.6B | $82.5B | $11.1B | -$55M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $345M | $107M | $173.3B | $12.8B | $46M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +50.8% | +27.6% | +42.9% | +64.4% | +55.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +4.3% | +14.6% | +20.5% | +23.0% | +8.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -11.2% | +7.4% | +8.8% | +18.8% | -4.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +7.8% | +0.1% | +18.4% | +21.8% | +3.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -0.1% | +48.2% | -2.1% | +9.7% | +42.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +84.1% | -62.3% | +98.1% | +29.5% | -70.2% |
Valuation Metrics
TKC leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 10.9x trailing earnings, TKC trades at a 97% valuation discount to VIAV's 340.3x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), TKC offers better value at 0.19x vs VIAV's 74.57x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.6B | $5.7B | $80.5B | $365.0B | $11.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $10.8B | $6.5B | $131.7B | $385.1B | $12.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -2.55x | 10.95x | 17.88x | 36.14x | 340.33x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 0.24x | 0.79x | 22.18x | 55.18x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.19x | 0.92x | — | 74.57x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 6.63x | 4.77x | 6.39x | 26.34x | 90.43x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.35x | 1.54x | 1.57x | 6.44x | 10.89x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.47x | 1.38x | 3.25x | 7.87x | 14.77x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 5.11x | 9.84x | 11.50x | 27.46x | 190.52x |
Profitability & Efficiency
CSCO leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CSCO delivers a 23.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $23 in annual profit, vs $-41 for LILA. TKC carries lower financial leverage with a 0.56x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to LILA's 8.67x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), TKC scores 8/9 vs VIAV's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -41.2% | +7.3% | +18.6% | +23.2% | -6.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -5.5% | +3.7% | +4.5% | +9.0% | -2.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +5.6% | +11.8% | +11.2% | +13.0% | +5.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +6.9% | +13.3% | +14.3% | +13.7% | +4.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 8 | 7 | 8 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 8.67x | 0.56x | 2.14x | 0.63x | 0.89x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $9.2B | $35.4B | $883.7B | $20.2B | $269M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $14M | $68.9B | $35.0B | $9.5B | $424M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $9.2B | $104.3B | $918.8B | $29.6B | $692M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.10x | 3.07x | 2.54x | 9.64x | 2.70x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
VIAV leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in AMX five years ago would be worth $34,527 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $5,397 for LILA. Over the past 12 months, VIAV leads with a +466.6% total return vs TKC's +18.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors VIAV at 77.7% vs LILA's -2.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +7.6% | +16.8% | +29.4% | +22.3% | +181.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +42.0% | +18.0% | +59.1% | +57.5% | +466.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -6.6% | +65.3% | +35.2% | +109.3% | +461.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -46.0% | +58.5% | +245.3% | +87.2% | +212.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -79.9% | -2.0% | +313.1% | +301.7% | +715.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -2.2% | +18.2% | +10.6% | +27.9% | +77.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — AMX and CSCO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
AMX is the less volatile stock with a 0.50 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than VIAV's 1.54 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CSCO currently trades 97.3% from its 52-week high vs VIAV's 84.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.71x | 0.60x | 0.50x | 0.92x | 1.54x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $9.04 | $7.17 | $27.70 | $94.72 | $60.43 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $4.25 | $5.35 | $16.60 | $59.07 | $8.87 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +86.4% | +91.1% | +96.6% | +97.3% | +84.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 48.7 | 58.1 | 61.5 | 63.9 | 66.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 261K | 1.1M | 1.8M | 18.9M | 6.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — TKC and CSCO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: LILA as "Buy", TKC as "Buy", AMX as "Buy", CSCO as "Buy", VIAV as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 4.7% upside for CSCO (target: $97) vs -36.8% for VIAV (target: $32). For income investors, TKC offers the higher dividend yield at 2.84% vs CSCO's 1.75%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $8.00 | — | $26.75 | $96.50 | $32.25 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 15 | 17 | 24 | 73 | 19 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +2.8% | +2.2% | +1.7% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 2 | 3 | 5 | 15 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $8.38 | $10.29 | $1.61 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.1% | +0.8% | +2.0% | +0.1% |
CSCO leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). TKC leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
LILA vs TKC vs AMX vs CSCO vs VIAV: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LILA or TKC or AMX or CSCO or VIAV a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Turkcell Iletisim Hizmetleri A.
S. (TKC) is the stronger pick with 55. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -0. 3% for Liberty Latin America Ltd. (LILA). Turkcell Iletisim Hizmetleri A. S. (TKC) offers the better valuation at 10. 9x trailing P/E (0. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Liberty Latin America Ltd. (LILA) 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 — LILA or TKC or AMX or CSCO or VIAV?
On trailing P/E, Turkcell Iletisim Hizmetleri A.
S. (TKC) is the cheapest at 10. 9x versus Viavi Solutions Inc. at 340. 3x. On forward P/E, Turkcell Iletisim Hizmetleri A. S. is actually cheaper at 0. 2x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Turkcell Iletisim Hizmetleri A. S. wins at 0. 00x versus Viavi Solutions Inc. 's 12. 09x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — LILA or TKC or AMX or CSCO or VIAV?
Over the past 5 years, América Móvil, S.
A. B. de C. V. (AMX) delivered a total return of +245. 3%, compared to -46. 0% for Liberty Latin America Ltd. (LILA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: VIAV returned +715. 5% versus LILA's -79. 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 — LILA or TKC or AMX or CSCO or VIAV?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), América Móvil, S.
A. B. de C. V. (AMX) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 50β versus Viavi Solutions Inc. 's 1. 54β — meaning VIAV is approximately 206% more volatile than AMX relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Turkcell Iletisim Hizmetleri A. S. (TKC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 56% versus 9% for Liberty Latin America Ltd. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — LILA or TKC or AMX or CSCO or VIAV?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Turkcell Iletisim Hizmetleri A.
S. (TKC) is pulling ahead at 55. 6% versus -0. 3% for Liberty Latin America Ltd. (LILA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: América Móvil, S. A. B. de C. V. grew EPS 248. 6% year-over-year, compared to 0. 4% for Cisco Systems, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, TKC leads at 15. 3% 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 — LILA or TKC or AMX or CSCO or VIAV?
Cisco Systems, Inc.
(CSCO) is the more profitable company, earning 18. 0% net margin versus -13. 8% for Liberty Latin America Ltd. — meaning it keeps 18. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: TKC leads at 21. 1% versus 6. 5% for VIAV. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CSCO leads at 64. 9%, 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 LILA or TKC or AMX or CSCO or VIAV 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, Turkcell Iletisim Hizmetleri A. S. (TKC) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 00x versus Viavi Solutions Inc. 's 12. 09x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Turkcell Iletisim Hizmetleri A. S. (TKC) trades at 0. 2x forward P/E versus 55. 2x for Viavi Solutions Inc. — 54. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CSCO: 4. 7% to $96. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — LILA or TKC or AMX or CSCO or VIAV?
In this comparison, TKC (2.
8% yield), AMX (2. 2% yield), CSCO (1. 7% yield) pay a dividend. LILA, VIAV do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is LILA or TKC or AMX or CSCO or VIAV better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, América Móvil, S.
A. B. de C. V. (AMX) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 50), 2. 2% yield, +313. 1% 10Y return). Viavi Solutions Inc. (VIAV) carries a higher beta of 1. 54 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (AMX: +313. 1%, VIAV: +715. 5%), 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 LILA and TKC and AMX and CSCO and VIAV?
These companies operate in different sectors (LILA (Communication Services) and TKC (Communication Services) and AMX (Communication Services) and CSCO (Technology) and VIAV (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: LILA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; TKC is a small-cap high-growth stock; AMX is a mid-cap deep-value stock; CSCO is a large-cap quality compounder stock; VIAV is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. TKC, AMX, CSCO pay a dividend while LILA, VIAV 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.