Semiconductors
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
MU vs IOSP vs INTC vs HWKN vs AMD
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Chemicals - Specialty
Semiconductors
Chemicals - Specialty
Semiconductors
MU vs IOSP vs INTC vs HWKN vs AMD — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Semiconductors | Chemicals - Specialty | Semiconductors | Chemicals - Specialty | Semiconductors |
| Market Cap | $842.38B | $2.00B | $627.10B | $3.47B | $742.11B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $58.12B | $1.79B | $53.76B | $1.06B | $37.45B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $24.11B | $114M | $-3.17B | $82M | $4.99B |
| Gross Margin | 58.4% | 27.4% | 35.4% | 22.9% | 50.3% |
| Operating Margin | 48.5% | 8.3% | -9.4% | 11.5% | 11.7% |
| Forward P/E | 13.1x | 16.2x | 116.5x | 42.4x | 62.4x |
| Total Debt | $15.28B | $90M | $46.59B | $160M | $4.47B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $9.64B | $293M | $14.27B | $5M | $5.54B |
MU vs IOSP vs INTC vs HWKN vs AMD — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Micron Technology, … (MU) | 100 | 1558.7 | +1458.7% |
| Innospec Inc. (IOSP) | 100 | 104.5 | +4.5% |
| Intel Corporation (INTC) | 100 | 198.5 | +98.5% |
| Hawkins, Inc. (HWKN) | 100 | 779.3 | +679.3% |
| Advanced Micro Devi… (AMD) | 100 | 846.1 | +746.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: MU vs IOSP vs INTC vs HWKN vs AMD
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
MU carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and valuation efficiency.
- Rev growth 48.9%, EPS growth 9.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 6.7%
- PEG 0.50 vs AMD's 12.08
- 48.9% revenue growth vs IOSP's -3.7%
- Lower P/E (13.1x vs 62.4x), PEG 0.50 vs 12.08
IOSP is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Dividend streak 12 yrs, beta 0.71, yield 2.1%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.71, Low D/E 6.7%, current ratio 2.79x
- Beta 0.71, yield 2.1%, current ratio 2.79x
- Beta 0.71 vs MU's 2.58, lower leverage
INTC plays a supporting role in this comparison — it may shine differently against other peers.
HWKN lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
AMD is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 123.7% 10Y total return vs MU's 74.9%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 48.9% revenue growth vs IOSP's -3.7% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (13.1x vs 62.4x), PEG 0.50 vs 12.08 | |
| Quality / Margins | 41.5% margin vs INTC's -5.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.71 vs MU's 2.58, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.1% yield, 12-year raise streak, vs MU's 0.1%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +7.8% vs IOSP's -11.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 27.7% ROA vs INTC's -1.6%, ROIC 13.2% vs -0.0% |
MU vs IOSP vs INTC vs HWKN vs AMD — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
MU vs IOSP vs INTC vs HWKN vs AMD — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MU leads in 3 of 6 categories
IOSP leads 2 • INTC leads 0 • HWKN leads 0 • AMD leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MU leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MU is the larger business by revenue, generating $58.1B annually — 54.7x HWKN's $1.1B. MU is the more profitable business, keeping 41.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to INTC's -5.9%. On growth, MU holds the edge at +196.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $58.1B | $1.8B | $53.8B | $1.1B | $37.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $37.0B | $181M | $4.0B | $172M | $6.6B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $24.1B | $114M | -$3.2B | $82M | $5.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $22.1B | $77M | -$3.1B | $88M | $8.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +58.4% | +27.4% | +35.4% | +22.9% | +50.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +48.5% | +8.3% | -9.4% | +11.5% | +11.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +41.5% | +6.4% | -5.9% | +7.8% | +13.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +38.0% | +4.3% | -5.8% | +8.2% | +22.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +196.3% | +2.8% | +7.2% | +7.9% | +37.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +7.6% | -6.9% | -2.8% | -4.2% | +90.9% |
Valuation Metrics
IOSP leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 17.2x trailing earnings, IOSP trades at a 90% valuation discount to AMD's 171.8x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), IOSP offers better value at 0.54x vs AMD's 33.25x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $842.4B | $2.0B | $627.1B | $3.5B | $742.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $848.0B | $1.8B | $659.4B | $3.6B | $741.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 98.39x | 17.25x | -2120.46x | 41.48x | 171.77x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 13.07x | 16.24x | 116.47x | 42.35x | 62.38x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 3.75x | 0.54x | — | 1.67x | 33.25x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 46.54x | 8.76x | 56.44x | 22.76x | 110.64x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 22.54x | 1.13x | 11.87x | 3.56x | 21.42x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 15.51x | 1.51x | 4.80x | 7.60x | 11.82x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 505.02x | 22.78x | — | 49.53x | 110.19x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MU leads this category, winning 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MU delivers a 40.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $41 in annual profit, vs $-3 for INTC. IOSP carries lower financial leverage with a 0.07x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to INTC's 0.37x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), AMD scores 8/9 vs HWKN's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +40.8% | +8.5% | -2.7% | +15.9% | +8.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +27.7% | +6.3% | -1.6% | +8.4% | +6.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +13.2% | +11.2% | -0.0% | +15.9% | +4.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +15.0% | +11.0% | -0.0% | +19.3% | +5.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.28x | 0.07x | 0.37x | 0.35x | 0.07x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $5.6B | -$203M | $32.3B | $155M | -$1.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $9.6B | $293M | $14.3B | $5M | $5.5B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $15.3B | $90M | $46.6B | $160M | $4.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 80.35x | — | 3.71x | 10.27x | 33.19x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MU leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MU five years ago would be worth $92,636 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8,726 for IOSP. Over the past 12 months, MU leads with a +777.6% total return vs IOSP's -11.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MU at 130.8% vs IOSP's -4.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +136.8% | +5.6% | +217.2% | +15.2% | +103.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +777.6% | -11.9% | +494.7% | +40.6% | +347.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +1129.2% | -13.4% | +307.9% | +319.2% | +378.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +826.4% | -12.7% | +129.0% | +409.1% | +499.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +7488.3% | +92.6% | +350.5% | +766.7% | +12371.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +130.8% | -4.7% | +59.8% | +61.2% | +68.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MU and IOSP each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
IOSP is the less volatile stock with a 0.71 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than MU's 2.58 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MU currently trades 100.0% from its 52-week high vs IOSP's 84.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.58x | 0.71x | 2.27x | 0.94x | 2.52x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $747.08 | $95.55 | $130.57 | $186.15 | $456.25 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $83.36 | $65.58 | $18.97 | $115.35 | $101.56 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +100.0% | +84.3% | +95.7% | +89.8% | +99.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 77.4 | 53.9 | 80.5 | 62.7 | 76.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 43.5M | 224K | 113.6M | 168K | 36.8M |
Analyst Outlook
IOSP leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: MU as "Buy", IOSP as "Hold", INTC as "Hold", HWKN as "Buy", AMD as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 42.8% upside for IOSP (target: $115) vs -37.3% for MU (target: $468). For income investors, IOSP offers the higher dividend yield at 2.11% vs HWKN's 0.42%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $468.24 | $115.00 | $79.55 | — | $401.65 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 68 | 9 | 84 | 1 | 70 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.1% | +2.1% | — | +0.4% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 12 | 0 | 5 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.46 | $1.70 | — | $0.70 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.7% | +0.2% |
MU leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). IOSP leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
MU vs IOSP vs INTC vs HWKN vs AMD: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is MU or IOSP or INTC or HWKN or AMD a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Micron Technology, Inc.
(MU) is the stronger pick with 48. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 7% for Innospec Inc. (IOSP). Innospec Inc. (IOSP) offers the better valuation at 17. 2x trailing P/E (16. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Micron Technology, Inc. (MU) a "Buy" — based on 68 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 — MU or IOSP or INTC or HWKN or AMD?
On trailing P/E, Innospec Inc.
(IOSP) is the cheapest at 17. 2x versus Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. at 171. 8x. On forward P/E, Micron Technology, Inc. is actually cheaper at 13. 1x — 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: Micron Technology, Inc. wins at 0. 50x versus Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. 's 12. 08x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — MU or IOSP or INTC or HWKN or AMD?
Over the past 5 years, Micron Technology, Inc.
(MU) delivered a total return of +826. 4%, compared to -12. 7% for Innospec Inc. (IOSP). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AMD returned +123. 7% versus IOSP's +92. 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 — MU or IOSP or INTC or HWKN or AMD?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Innospec Inc.
(IOSP) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 71β versus Micron Technology, Inc. 's 2. 58β — meaning MU is approximately 264% more volatile than IOSP relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Innospec Inc. (IOSP) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 7% versus 37% for Intel Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — MU or IOSP or INTC or HWKN or AMD?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Micron Technology, Inc.
(MU) is pulling ahead at 48. 9% versus -3. 7% for Innospec Inc. (IOSP). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Micron Technology, Inc. grew EPS 984. 3% year-over-year, compared to 12. 3% for Hawkins, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, AMD leads at 13. 6% 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 — MU or IOSP or INTC or HWKN or AMD?
Micron Technology, Inc.
(MU) is the more profitable company, earning 22. 8% net margin versus -0. 5% for Intel Corporation — meaning it keeps 22. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MU leads at 26. 4% versus -0. 0% for INTC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — AMD leads at 49. 5%, 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 MU or IOSP or INTC or HWKN or AMD 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, Micron Technology, Inc. (MU) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 50x versus Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. 's 12. 08x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Micron Technology, Inc. (MU) trades at 13. 1x forward P/E versus 116. 5x for Intel Corporation — 103. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for IOSP: 42. 8% to $115. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — MU or IOSP or INTC or HWKN or AMD?
In this comparison, IOSP (2.
1% yield), HWKN (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. MU, INTC, AMD do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is MU or IOSP or INTC or HWKN or AMD better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Innospec Inc.
(IOSP) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 71), 2. 1% yield). Micron Technology, Inc. (MU) carries a higher beta of 2. 58 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (IOSP: +92. 6%, MU: +74. 9%), 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 MU and IOSP and INTC and HWKN and AMD?
These companies operate in different sectors (MU (Technology) and IOSP (Basic Materials) and INTC (Technology) and HWKN (Basic Materials) and AMD (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: MU is a large-cap high-growth stock; IOSP is a small-cap deep-value stock; INTC is a large-cap quality compounder stock; HWKN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; AMD is a large-cap high-growth stock. IOSP pays a dividend while MU, INTC, HWKN, AMD 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.