Leisure
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
MMA vs NFLX vs DIS vs FUBO vs CMCSA
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Entertainment
Entertainment
Broadcasting
Telecommunications Services
MMA vs NFLX vs DIS vs FUBO vs CMCSA — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Leisure | Entertainment | Entertainment | Broadcasting | Telecommunications Services |
| Market Cap | $14M | $374.00B | $192.60B | $317M | $95.62B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $562K | $45.18B | $97.26B | $2.72B | $125.28B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-14M | $10.98B | $11.22B | $156M | $18.60B |
| Gross Margin | 71.4% | 48.5% | 37.2% | 11.1% | 61.7% |
| Operating Margin | -22.3% | 29.5% | 15.5% | -2.6% | 15.3% |
| Forward P/E | — | 24.8x | 16.5x | — | 7.4x |
| Total Debt | $259K | $14.46B | $44.88B | $670M | $110.44B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $4M | $9.03B | $5.70B | $452M | $9.48B |
MMA vs NFLX vs DIS vs FUBO vs CMCSA — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Mar 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mixed Martial Arts … (MMA) | 100 | 13.1 | -86.9% |
| Netflix, Inc. (NFLX) | 100 | 145.3 | +45.3% |
| The Walt Disney Com… (DIS) | 100 | 88.9 | -11.1% |
| fuboTV Inc. (FUBO) | 100 | 56.8 | -43.2% |
| Comcast Corporation (CMCSA) | 100 | 60.5 | -39.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: MMA vs NFLX vs DIS vs FUBO vs CMCSA
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
MMA is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.45, Low D/E 10.1%, current ratio 1.41x
NFLX is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 8.8% 10Y total return vs CMCSA's 15.4%
- 24.3% margin vs MMA's -25.6%
- 19.8% ROA vs MMA's -229.6%
DIS ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +7.7% vs FUBO's -65.6%
FUBO is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 67.7%, EPS growth 96.3%, 3Y rev CAGR 39.2%
- 67.7% revenue growth vs MMA's -63.4%
CMCSA carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and valuation efficiency.
- Dividend streak 18 yrs, beta 0.21, yield 5.1%
- PEG 0.40 vs NFLX's 0.75
- Beta 0.21, yield 5.1%, current ratio 0.88x
- Better valuation composite
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 67.7% revenue growth vs MMA's -63.4% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 24.3% margin vs MMA's -25.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.21 vs FUBO's 1.77 | |
| Dividends | 5.1% yield, 18-year raise streak, vs DIS's 0.9%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +7.7% vs FUBO's -65.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 19.8% ROA vs MMA's -229.6% |
MMA vs NFLX vs DIS vs FUBO vs CMCSA — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
MMA vs NFLX vs DIS vs FUBO vs CMCSA — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
NFLX leads in 3 of 6 categories
CMCSA leads 2 • MMA leads 0 • DIS leads 0 • FUBO leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NFLX leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CMCSA is the larger business by revenue, generating $125.3B annually — 222789.1x MMA's $562,312. NFLX is the more profitable business, keeping 24.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to MMA's -25.6%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $562,312 | $45.2B | $97.3B | $2.7B | $125.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | — | $30.1B | $20.5B | -$14M | $35.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | — | $11.0B | $11.2B | $156M | $18.6B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | — | $9.5B | $7.1B | -$81M | $18.1B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +71.4% | +48.5% | +37.2% | +11.1% | +61.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -22.3% | +29.5% | +15.5% | -2.6% | +15.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -25.6% | +24.3% | +11.5% | +5.7% | +14.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -17.1% | +20.9% | +7.3% | -3.0% | +14.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +17.6% | +6.5% | +2.5% | +5.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +31.1% | -29.8% | +81.8% | -32.6% |
Valuation Metrics
CMCSA leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 4.9x trailing earnings, CMCSA trades at a 86% valuation discount to NFLX's 34.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), CMCSA offers better value at 0.26x vs NFLX's 1.06x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $14M | $374.0B | $192.6B | $317M | $95.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $12M | $379.4B | $231.8B | $534M | $196.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.54x | 34.89x | 15.87x | -44.88x | 4.87x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 24.80x | 16.53x | — | 7.44x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.06x | — | — | 0.26x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 12.61x | 12.10x | — | 5.33x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 35.48x | 8.28x | 2.04x | 0.12x | 0.77x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 3.02x | 14.32x | 1.72x | 0.12x | 0.98x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 39.53x | 19.11x | — | 4.37x |
Profitability & Efficiency
NFLX leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
NFLX delivers a 41.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $41 in annual profit, vs $-6 for MMA. MMA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.10x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CMCSA's 1.13x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), DIS scores 8/9 vs FUBO's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -5.6% | +41.3% | +9.8% | +16.2% | +19.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -2.3% | +19.8% | +5.6% | +8.1% | +6.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | +29.8% | +6.9% | -3.3% | +8.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -4.6% | +30.5% | +8.5% | -4.1% | +8.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 7 | 8 | 4 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.10x | 0.54x | 0.39x | 0.25x | 1.13x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$3M | $5.4B | $39.2B | $218M | $101.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $4M | $9.0B | $5.7B | $452M | $9.5B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $259,281 | $14.5B | $44.9B | $670M | $110.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -3.87x | 17.33x | 9.95x | 10.35x | 6.84x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
NFLX leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in NFLX five years ago would be worth $17,519 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $521 for FUBO. Over the past 12 months, DIS leads with a +7.7% total return vs FUBO's -65.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NFLX at 38.6% vs MMA's -49.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -50.8% | -3.0% | -2.8% | -65.3% | -8.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -33.2% | -23.6% | +7.7% | -65.6% | -19.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -86.9% | +166.5% | +8.0% | -51.7% | -26.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -86.9% | +75.2% | -39.8% | -94.8% | -45.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -86.9% | +875.3% | +11.8% | -90.3% | +15.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -49.3% | +38.6% | +2.6% | -21.6% | -9.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — DIS and CMCSA each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CMCSA is the less volatile stock with a 0.21 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than FUBO's 1.77 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. DIS currently trades 87.2% from its 52-week high vs MMA's 17.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.45x | 0.39x | 0.90x | 1.77x | 0.21x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $3.07 | $134.12 | $124.69 | $56.64 | $36.66 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.35 | $75.01 | $92.19 | $2.48 | $25.75 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +17.8% | +65.8% | +87.2% | +19.0% | +71.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 48.8 | 35.3 | 64.4 | 38.0 | 37.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 446K | 44.0M | 9.1M | 1.9M | 28.4M |
Analyst Outlook
CMCSA leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NFLX as "Buy", DIS as "Buy", FUBO as "Hold", CMCSA as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 299.3% upside for FUBO (target: $43) vs 21.5% for CMCSA (target: $32). For income investors, CMCSA offers the higher dividend yield at 5.13% vs DIS's 0.92%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $116.29 | $139.50 | $43.00 | $31.87 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 99 | 63 | 14 | 60 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +0.9% | — | +5.1% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 1 | — | 18 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $1.00 | — | $1.35 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +2.4% | +1.8% | 0.0% | +7.5% |
NFLX leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). CMCSA leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
MMA vs NFLX vs DIS vs FUBO vs CMCSA: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is MMA or NFLX or DIS or FUBO or CMCSA a better buy right now?
For growth investors, fuboTV Inc.
(FUBO) is the stronger pick with 67. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -63. 4% for Mixed Martial Arts Group Limited (MMA). Comcast Corporation (CMCSA) offers the better valuation at 4. 9x trailing P/E (7. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Netflix, Inc. (NFLX) a "Buy" — based on 99 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 — MMA or NFLX or DIS or FUBO or CMCSA?
On trailing P/E, Comcast Corporation (CMCSA) is the cheapest at 4.
9x versus Netflix, Inc. at 34. 9x. On forward P/E, Comcast Corporation is actually cheaper at 7. 4x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Comcast Corporation wins at 0. 40x versus Netflix, Inc. 's 0. 75x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — MMA or NFLX or DIS or FUBO or CMCSA?
Over the past 5 years, Netflix, Inc.
(NFLX) delivered a total return of +75. 2%, compared to -94. 8% for fuboTV Inc. (FUBO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NFLX returned +875. 3% versus FUBO's -90. 3%. 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 — MMA or NFLX or DIS or FUBO or CMCSA?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Comcast Corporation (CMCSA) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
21β versus fuboTV Inc. 's 1. 77β — meaning FUBO is approximately 743% more volatile than CMCSA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Mixed Martial Arts Group Limited (MMA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 10% versus 113% for Comcast Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — MMA or NFLX or DIS or FUBO or CMCSA?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), fuboTV Inc.
(FUBO) is pulling ahead at 67. 7% versus -63. 4% for Mixed Martial Arts Group Limited (MMA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Walt Disney Company grew EPS 151. 8% year-over-year, compared to 27. 6% for Netflix, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, FUBO leads at 39. 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 — MMA or NFLX or DIS or FUBO or CMCSA?
Netflix, Inc.
(NFLX) is the more profitable company, earning 24. 3% net margin versus -25. 6% for Mixed Martial Arts Group Limited — meaning it keeps 24. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NFLX leads at 29. 5% versus -22. 3% for MMA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MMA leads at 71. 4%, 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 MMA or NFLX or DIS or FUBO or CMCSA 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, Comcast Corporation (CMCSA) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 40x versus Netflix, Inc. 's 0. 75x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Comcast Corporation (CMCSA) trades at 7. 4x forward P/E versus 24. 8x for Netflix, Inc. — 17. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FUBO: 299. 3% to $43. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — MMA or NFLX or DIS or FUBO or CMCSA?
In this comparison, CMCSA (5.
1% yield), DIS (0. 9% yield) pay a dividend. MMA, NFLX, FUBO do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is MMA or NFLX or DIS or FUBO or CMCSA better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Comcast Corporation (CMCSA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
21), 5. 1% yield). fuboTV Inc. (FUBO) carries a higher beta of 1. 77 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (CMCSA: +15. 4%, FUBO: -90. 3%), 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 MMA and NFLX and DIS and FUBO and CMCSA?
These companies operate in different sectors (MMA (Consumer Cyclical) and NFLX (Communication Services) and DIS (Communication Services) and FUBO (Communication Services) and CMCSA (Communication Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: MMA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NFLX is a large-cap high-growth stock; DIS is a mid-cap deep-value stock; FUBO is a small-cap high-growth stock; CMCSA is a mid-cap deep-value stock. DIS, CMCSA pay a dividend while MMA, NFLX, FUBO 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.