Software - Application
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
PDFS vs KLAC vs AMAT vs ONTO vs LRCX
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Semiconductors
Semiconductors
Semiconductors
Semiconductors
PDFS vs KLAC vs AMAT vs ONTO vs LRCX — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Software - Application | Semiconductors | Semiconductors | Semiconductors | Semiconductors |
| Market Cap | $2.06B | $245.60B | $345.24B | $14.16B | $367.20B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $231M | $13.10B | $28.37B | $1.03B | $21.68B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $7M | $4.67B | $7.00B | $106M | $6.71B |
| Gross Margin | 72.5% | 61.8% | 48.7% | 48.8% | 50.0% |
| Operating Margin | 6.8% | 42.1% | 29.2% | 10.0% | 34.3% |
| Forward P/E | 44.4x | 50.5x | 39.3x | 39.9x | 51.8x |
| Total Debt | $77M | $6.09B | $6.55B | $17M | $4.76B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $42M | $2.08B | $7.24B | $346M | $6.39B |
PDFS vs KLAC vs AMAT vs ONTO vs LRCX — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| PDF Solutions, Inc. (PDFS) | 100 | 302.6 | +202.6% |
| KLA Corporation (KLAC) | 100 | 1062.3 | +962.3% |
| Applied Materials, … (AMAT) | 100 | 774.9 | +674.9% |
| Onto Innovation Inc. (ONTO) | 100 | 915.9 | +815.9% |
| Lam Research Corpor… (LRCX) | 100 | 1074.4 | +974.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: PDFS vs KLAC vs AMAT vs ONTO vs LRCX
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, PDFS doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
KLAC has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure.
- Rev growth 23.9%, EPS growth 49.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 9.7%
- 23.9% revenue growth vs ONTO's 1.8%
- 35.7% margin vs PDFS's 3.1%
AMAT is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Dividend streak 8 yrs, beta 2.19, yield 0.4%
- Lower volatility, beta 2.19, Low D/E 32.1%, current ratio 2.61x
- Beta 2.19, yield 0.4%, current ratio 2.61x
- Beta 2.19 vs LRCX's 2.61, lower leverage
ONTO is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 1.16 vs LRCX's 2.31
- Lower P/E (39.9x vs 51.8x), PEG 1.16 vs 2.31
LRCX ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding.
- 39.2% 10Y total return vs KLAC's 26.7%
- +293.9% vs ONTO's +124.5%
- 31.4% ROA vs PDFS's 1.7%, ROIC 55.7% vs 1.9%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 23.9% revenue growth vs ONTO's 1.8% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (39.9x vs 51.8x), PEG 1.16 vs 2.31 | |
| Quality / Margins | 35.7% margin vs PDFS's 3.1% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 2.19 vs LRCX's 2.61, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 0.4% yield, 8-year raise streak, vs LRCX's 0.3%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +293.9% vs ONTO's +124.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 31.4% ROA vs PDFS's 1.7%, ROIC 55.7% vs 1.9% |
PDFS vs KLAC vs AMAT vs ONTO vs LRCX — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
PDFS vs KLAC vs AMAT vs ONTO vs LRCX — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
LRCX leads in 2 of 6 categories
AMAT leads 1 • PDFS leads 0 • KLAC leads 0 • ONTO leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — PDFS and KLAC each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AMAT is the larger business by revenue, generating $28.4B annually — 122.6x PDFS's $231M. KLAC is the more profitable business, keeping 35.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PDFS's 3.1%. On growth, PDFS holds the edge at +25.9% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $231M | $13.1B | $28.4B | $1.0B | $21.7B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $23M | $5.9B | $8.4B | $158M | $7.8B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $7M | $4.7B | $7.0B | $106M | $6.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$18M | $4.0B | $5.7B | $239M | $6.5B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +72.5% | +61.8% | +48.7% | +48.8% | +50.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +6.8% | +42.1% | +29.2% | +10.0% | +34.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +3.1% | +35.7% | +24.7% | +10.3% | +30.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -7.8% | +30.7% | +20.1% | +23.2% | +29.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +25.9% | +11.5% | -3.5% | +9.5% | +23.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +2.5% | +11.8% | +13.9% | -48.5% | +40.8% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — PDFS and AMAT and ONTO each lead in 2 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 50.3x trailing earnings, AMAT trades at a 51% valuation discount to ONTO's 102.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), KLAC offers better value at 1.95x vs LRCX's 3.16x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.1B | $245.6B | $345.2B | $14.2B | $367.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.1B | $249.6B | $344.6B | $13.8B | $365.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -3167.48x | 61.55x | 50.27x | 102.40x | 70.86x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 44.41x | 50.50x | 39.27x | 39.93x | 51.78x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.95x | 2.93x | 2.96x | 3.16x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 121.84x | 44.29x | 41.02x | 71.53x | 58.14x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 9.40x | 20.20x | 12.17x | 14.09x | 19.92x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 7.49x | 53.28x | 17.23x | 6.68x | 38.47x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 65.64x | 60.59x | 47.23x | 67.82x |
Profitability & Efficiency
LRCX leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
KLAC delivers a 89.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $89 in annual profit, vs $3 for PDFS. ONTO carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to KLAC's 1.30x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), KLAC scores 9/9 vs PDFS's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +2.7% | +89.1% | +34.3% | +5.2% | +65.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.7% | +28.3% | +19.3% | +4.7% | +31.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +1.9% | +46.5% | +33.3% | +5.7% | +55.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +1.9% | +46.1% | +30.6% | +6.5% | +40.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 9 | 7 | 4 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.28x | 1.30x | 0.32x | 0.01x | 0.48x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $34M | $4.0B | -$686M | -$329M | -$1.6B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $42M | $2.1B | $7.2B | $346M | $6.4B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $77M | $6.1B | $6.6B | $17M | $4.8B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 3.85x | 19.38x | 35.46x | — | 58.92x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LRCX leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in KLAC five years ago would be worth $63,274 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $28,454 for PDFS. Over the past 12 months, LRCX leads with a +293.9% total return vs ONTO's +124.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors LRCX at 77.9% vs PDFS's 10.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +74.7% | +46.8% | +62.1% | +71.6% | +59.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +163.4% | +166.8% | +180.3% | +124.5% | +293.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +33.1% | +392.4% | +280.2% | +230.4% | +463.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +184.5% | +532.7% | +254.5% | +360.4% | +408.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +299.9% | +2665.1% | +2139.3% | +1491.2% | +3917.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +10.0% | +70.1% | +56.1% | +48.9% | +77.9% |
Risk & Volatility
AMAT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
AMAT is the less volatile stock with a 2.19 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LRCX's 2.61 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. AMAT currently trades 99.4% from its 52-week high vs ONTO's 90.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.25x | 2.23x | 2.19x | 2.60x | 2.61x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $52.28 | $1939.36 | $438.00 | $315.86 | $298.00 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $17.35 | $692.80 | $153.47 | $85.88 | $74.65 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +98.8% | +96.4% | +99.4% | +90.1% | +98.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 68.5 | 53.7 | 57.8 | 51.2 | 63.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 415K | 973K | 6.0M | 827K | 9.7M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — AMAT and LRCX each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: PDFS as "Buy", KLAC as "Buy", AMAT as "Buy", ONTO as "Buy", LRCX as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 16.5% upside for ONTO (target: $332) vs -7.0% for PDFS (target: $48). For income investors, AMAT offers the higher dividend yield at 0.39% vs LRCX's 0.30%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $48.00 | $1819.38 | $437.10 | $331.67 | $291.17 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 5 | 44 | 53 | 11 | 50 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.4% | +0.4% | — | +0.3% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 8 | 8 | — | 11 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $6.76 | $1.71 | — | $0.89 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.0% | +0.9% | +1.4% | +0.5% | +0.9% |
LRCX leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). AMAT leads in 1 (Risk & Volatility). 3 tied.
PDFS vs KLAC vs AMAT vs ONTO vs LRCX: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is PDFS or KLAC or AMAT or ONTO or LRCX a better buy right now?
For growth investors, KLA Corporation (KLAC) is the stronger pick with 23.
9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 8% for Onto Innovation Inc. (ONTO). Applied Materials, Inc. (AMAT) offers the better valuation at 50. 3x trailing P/E (39. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate PDF Solutions, Inc. (PDFS) a "Buy" — based on 5 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 — PDFS or KLAC or AMAT or ONTO or LRCX?
On trailing P/E, Applied Materials, Inc.
(AMAT) is the cheapest at 50. 3x versus Onto Innovation Inc. at 102. 4x. On forward P/E, Applied Materials, Inc. is actually cheaper at 39. 3x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Onto Innovation Inc. wins at 1. 16x versus Lam Research Corporation's 2. 31x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — PDFS or KLAC or AMAT or ONTO or LRCX?
Over the past 5 years, KLA Corporation (KLAC) delivered a total return of +532.
7%, compared to +184. 5% for PDF Solutions, Inc. (PDFS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LRCX returned +39. 2% versus PDFS's +299. 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 — PDFS or KLAC or AMAT or ONTO or LRCX?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Applied Materials, Inc.
(AMAT) is the lower-risk stock at 2. 19β versus Lam Research Corporation's 2. 61β — meaning LRCX is approximately 19% more volatile than AMAT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Onto Innovation Inc. (ONTO) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 130% for KLA Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — PDFS or KLAC or AMAT or ONTO or LRCX?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), KLA Corporation (KLAC) is pulling ahead at 23.
9% versus 1. 8% for Onto Innovation Inc. (ONTO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: KLA Corporation grew EPS 49. 8% year-over-year, compared to -116. 3% for PDF Solutions, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, PDFS leads at 13. 8% 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 — PDFS or KLAC or AMAT or ONTO or LRCX?
KLA Corporation (KLAC) is the more profitable company, earning 33.
4% net margin versus -0. 3% for PDF Solutions, Inc. — meaning it keeps 33. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: KLAC leads at 43. 1% versus 2. 7% for PDFS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — PDFS leads at 74. 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 PDFS or KLAC or AMAT or ONTO or LRCX 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, Onto Innovation Inc. (ONTO) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 16x versus Lam Research Corporation's 2. 31x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Applied Materials, Inc. (AMAT) trades at 39. 3x forward P/E versus 51. 8x for Lam Research Corporation — 12. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ONTO: 16. 5% to $331. 67.
08Which pays a better dividend — PDFS or KLAC or AMAT or ONTO or LRCX?
In this comparison, AMAT (0.
4% yield), KLAC (0. 4% yield), LRCX (0. 3% yield) pay a dividend. PDFS, ONTO do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is PDFS or KLAC or AMAT or ONTO or LRCX better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Onto Innovation Inc.
(ONTO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (+1491% 10Y return). Applied Materials, Inc. (AMAT) carries a higher beta of 2. 19 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ONTO: +1491%, AMAT: +21. 4%), 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 PDFS and KLAC and AMAT and ONTO and LRCX?
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: PDFS is a small-cap high-growth stock; KLAC is a large-cap high-growth stock; AMAT is a large-cap quality compounder stock; ONTO is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; LRCX is a large-cap high-growth stock. 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.