Software - Application
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
OBLG vs LPSN vs ZM vs MSFT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Software - Application
Software - Application
Software - Infrastructure
OBLG vs LPSN vs ZM vs MSFT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Software - Application | Software - Application | Software - Application | Software - Infrastructure |
| Market Cap | $1M | $32M | $33.30B | $3.13T |
| Revenue (TTM) | $2M | $244M | $4.87B | $318.27B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-4M | $-67M | $1.90B | $125.22B |
| Gross Margin | 36.0% | 62.2% | 77.0% | 68.3% |
| Operating Margin | -130.5% | -9.6% | 23.1% | 46.8% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 18.4x | 25.3x |
| Total Debt | $0.00 | $392M | $31M | $112.18B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $5M | $95M | $1.27B | $30.24B |
OBLG vs LPSN vs ZM vs MSFT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | Feb 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oblong, Inc. (OBLG) | 100 | 0.2 | -99.8% |
| LivePerson, Inc. (LPSN) | 100 | 0.5 | -99.5% |
| Zoom Communications… (ZM) | 100 | 51.3 | -48.7% |
| Microsoft Corporati… (MSFT) | 100 | 234.8 | +134.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: OBLG vs LPSN vs ZM vs MSFT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
OBLG plays a supporting role in this comparison — it may shine differently against other peers.
LPSN lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
ZM is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Rev growth 4.4%, EPS growth 92.5%, 3Y rev CAGR 3.5%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.95, Low D/E 0.3%, current ratio 4.33x
- PEG 0.82 vs MSFT's 1.35
- Beta 0.95, current ratio 4.33x
MSFT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 19 yrs, beta 0.89, yield 0.8%
- 7.9% 10Y total return vs ZM's 74.8%
- 14.9% revenue growth vs OBLG's -37.6%
- 39.3% margin vs OBLG's -187.2%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 14.9% revenue growth vs OBLG's -37.6% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (18.4x vs 25.3x), PEG 0.82 vs 1.35 | |
| Quality / Margins | 39.3% margin vs OBLG's -187.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.89 vs OBLG's 3.31 | |
| Dividends | 0.8% yield; 19-year raise streak; the other 3 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +37.8% vs LPSN's -77.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 19.2% ROA vs OBLG's -40.9% |
OBLG vs LPSN vs ZM vs MSFT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
OBLG vs LPSN vs ZM vs MSFT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MSFT leads in 3 of 6 categories
ZM leads 2 • OBLG leads 0 • LPSN leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MSFT leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MSFT is the larger business by revenue, generating $318.3B annually — 133840.6x OBLG's $2M. MSFT is the more profitable business, keeping 39.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to OBLG's -187.2%. On growth, MSFT holds the edge at +18.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $2M | $244M | $4.9B | $318.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$5M | -$562,000 | $1.3B | $192.6B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$4M | -$67M | $1.9B | $125.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$3M | -$43M | $1.9B | $72.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +36.0% | +62.2% | +77.0% | +68.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -130.5% | -9.6% | +23.1% | +46.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -187.2% | -27.6% | +39.0% | +39.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -129.4% | -17.4% | +39.5% | +22.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +4.0% | -19.0% | +5.3% | +18.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +93.4% | +79.4% | +91.4% | +23.4% |
Valuation Metrics
ZM leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 17.5x trailing earnings, ZM trades at a 43% valuation discount to MSFT's 30.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), ZM offers better value at 0.78x vs MSFT's 1.64x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1M | $32M | $33.3B | $3.13T |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | -$4M | $329M | $32.1B | $3.21T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.07x | -0.22x | 17.53x | 30.86x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 18.44x | 25.34x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.78x | 1.64x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 25.52x | 19.72x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.53x | 0.13x | 6.84x | 11.10x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.23x | — | 3.40x | 9.15x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 17.31x | 43.66x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MSFT leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MSFT delivers a 33.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $33 in annual profit, vs $-45 for OBLG. ZM carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MSFT's 0.33x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ZM scores 7/9 vs OBLG's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -45.3% | — | +19.4% | +33.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -40.9% | -12.4% | +15.9% | +19.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | -6.6% | +10.4% | +24.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -88.2% | -5.8% | +11.8% | +29.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | — | 0.00x | 0.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$5M | $297M | -$1.2B | $81.9B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $5M | $95M | $1.3B | $30.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $0 | $392M | $31M | $112.2B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 0.20x | — | 55.65x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
ZM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MSFT five years ago would be worth $17,246 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $4 for OBLG. Over the past 12 months, ZM leads with a +37.8% total return vs LPSN's -77.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ZM at 19.9% vs OBLG's -74.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -44.2% | -31.1% | +30.1% | -10.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -58.5% | -77.1% | +37.8% | -2.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.4% | -95.8% | +72.2% | +39.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | -99.7% | -63.3% | +72.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.9% | -97.0% | +74.8% | +787.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -74.6% | -65.4% | +19.9% | +11.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ZM and MSFT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MSFT is the less volatile stock with a 0.89 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than OBLG's 3.31 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ZM currently trades 99.0% from its 52-week high vs LPSN's 12.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 3.31x | 2.05x | 0.95x | 0.89x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $5.50 | $21.60 | $109.50 | $555.45 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.96 | $2.37 | $69.15 | $356.28 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +20.0% | +12.4% | +99.0% | +75.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 26.1 | 40.3 | 71.2 | 54.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 95K | 148K | 4.4M | 32.5M |
Analyst Outlook
MSFT leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ZM as "Hold", MSFT as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 31.1% upside for MSFT (target: $552) vs -7.2% for ZM (target: $101). MSFT is the only dividend payer here at 0.77% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | — | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | — | $100.56 | $551.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | — | 48 | 81 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +0.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | — | — | 19 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $3.23 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +4.9% | +0.6% |
MSFT leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). ZM leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Total Returns). 1 tied.
OBLG vs LPSN vs ZM vs MSFT: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is OBLG or LPSN or ZM or MSFT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the stronger pick with 14.
9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -37. 6% for Oblong, Inc. (OBLG). Zoom Communications, Inc. (ZM) offers the better valuation at 17. 5x trailing P/E (18. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) a "Buy" — based on 81 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 — OBLG or LPSN or ZM or MSFT?
On trailing P/E, Zoom Communications, Inc.
(ZM) is the cheapest at 17. 5x versus Microsoft Corporation at 30. 9x. On forward P/E, Zoom Communications, Inc. is actually cheaper at 18. 4x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Zoom Communications, Inc. wins at 0. 82x versus Microsoft Corporation's 1. 35x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — OBLG or LPSN or ZM or MSFT?
Over the past 5 years, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) delivered a total return of +72.
5%, compared to -100. 0% for Oblong, Inc. (OBLG). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MSFT returned +787. 7% versus OBLG's -99. 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 — OBLG or LPSN or ZM or MSFT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
89β versus Oblong, Inc. 's 3. 31β — meaning OBLG is approximately 274% more volatile than MSFT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Zoom Communications, Inc. (ZM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 33% for Microsoft Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — OBLG or LPSN or ZM or MSFT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is pulling ahead at 14.
9% versus -37. 6% for Oblong, Inc. (OBLG). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Zoom Communications, Inc. grew EPS 92. 5% year-over-year, compared to 15. 6% for Microsoft Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, MSFT leads at 12. 4% 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 — OBLG or LPSN or ZM or MSFT?
Zoom Communications, Inc.
(ZM) is the more profitable company, earning 39. 0% net margin versus -170. 0% for Oblong, Inc. — meaning it keeps 39. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MSFT leads at 45. 6% versus -176. 7% for OBLG. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ZM leads at 77. 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 OBLG or LPSN or ZM or MSFT 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, Zoom Communications, Inc. (ZM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 82x versus Microsoft Corporation's 1. 35x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Zoom Communications, Inc. (ZM) trades at 18. 4x forward P/E versus 25. 3x for Microsoft Corporation — 6. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MSFT: 31. 1% to $551. 75.
08Which pays a better dividend — OBLG or LPSN or ZM or MSFT?
In this comparison, MSFT (0.
8% yield) pays a dividend. OBLG, LPSN, ZM do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is OBLG or LPSN or ZM or MSFT better for a retirement portfolio?
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.
89), 0. 8% yield, +787. 7% 10Y return). Oblong, Inc. (OBLG) carries a higher beta of 3. 31 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (MSFT: +787. 7%, OBLG: -99. 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 OBLG and LPSN and ZM and MSFT?
Both stocks operate in the Technology sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: OBLG is a small-cap quality compounder stock; LPSN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ZM is a mid-cap deep-value stock; MSFT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock. MSFT pays a dividend while OBLG, LPSN, ZM 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.