MSFT vs META

For growth investors, Meta Platforms, Inc.

(META) is the stronger pick with 22. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 17. 8% for Microsoft Corporation (MSFT). Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) offers the better valuation at 27. 7x trailing P/E (25. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) a "Buy" — based on 82 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.

On trailing P/E, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the cheapest at 27.

7x versus Meta Platforms, Inc. at 31. 4x. On forward P/E, Meta Platforms, Inc. is actually cheaper at 23. 5x — 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: Meta Platforms, Inc. wins at 1. 28x versus Microsoft Corporation's 1. 45x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.

Over the past 5 years, Meta Platforms, Inc.

(META) delivered a total return of +116. 3%, compared to +71. 9% for Microsoft Corporation (MSFT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MSFT returned +803. 9% versus META's +470. 6%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

96β versus Meta Platforms, Inc. 's 1. 37β — meaning META is approximately 43% more volatile than MSFT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 29% versus 39% for Meta Platforms, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Meta Platforms, Inc.

(META) is pulling ahead at 22. 2% versus 17. 8% for Microsoft Corporation (MSFT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Microsoft Corporation grew EPS 31. 6% year-over-year, compared to -1. 6% for Meta Platforms, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, META leads at 19. 9% 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.

Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the more profitable company, earning 40.

3% net margin versus 30. 1% for Meta Platforms, Inc. — meaning it keeps 40. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MSFT leads at 46. 8% versus 41. 4% for META. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — META leads at 82. 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.

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, Meta Platforms, Inc. (META) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 28x versus Microsoft Corporation's 1. 45x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Meta Platforms, Inc. (META) trades at 23. 5x forward P/E versus 25. 2x for Microsoft Corporation — 1. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MSFT: 11. 1% to $553. 39.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) offers the highest yield at 0. 7%, versus 0. 3% for Meta Platforms, Inc. (META).

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.

96), 0. 7% yield, +803. 9% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MSFT: +803. 9%, META: +470. 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.

These companies operate in different sectors (MSFT (Technology) and META (Communication Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

MSFT pays a dividend while META does 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.