Computer Hardware
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
QBTS vs IBM vs MSFT vs NVDA vs INTC
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Information Technology Services
Software - Infrastructure
Semiconductors
Semiconductors
QBTS vs IBM vs MSFT vs NVDA vs INTC — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Computer Hardware | Information Technology Services | Software - Infrastructure | Semiconductors | Semiconductors |
| Market Cap | $8.02B | $215.52B | $3.08T | $5.23T | $627.10B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $25M | $68.91B | $318.27B | $215.94B | $53.76B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-355M | $10.75B | $125.22B | $120.07B | $-3.17B |
| Gross Margin | 82.6% | 59.0% | 68.3% | 71.1% | 35.4% |
| Operating Margin | -408.2% | 16.4% | 46.8% | 60.4% | -9.4% |
| Forward P/E | — | 18.5x | 24.8x | 26.0x | 116.5x |
| Total Debt | $8M | $67.15B | $112.18B | $11.41B | $46.59B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $635M | $13.64B | $30.24B | $10.61B | $14.27B |
QBTS vs IBM vs MSFT vs NVDA vs INTC — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Dec 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| D-Wave Quantum Inc. (QBTS) | 100 | 216.6 | +116.6% |
| International Busin… (IBM) | 100 | 191.1 | +91.1% |
| Microsoft Corporati… (MSFT) | 100 | 186.6 | +86.6% |
| NVIDIA Corporation (NVDA) | 100 | 1647.9 | +1547.9% |
| Intel Corporation (INTC) | 100 | 250.7 | +150.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: QBTS vs IBM vs MSFT vs NVDA vs INTC
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
QBTS ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth.
- 178.5% revenue growth vs INTC's -0.5%
IBM has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability.
- Dividend streak 30 yrs, beta 1.00, yield 2.9%
- Lower P/E (18.5x vs 116.5x)
- 2.9% yield, 30-year raise streak, vs NVDA's 0.0%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
MSFT is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.85, Low D/E 32.7%, current ratio 1.35x
- Beta 0.85, yield 0.8%, current ratio 1.35x
- Beta 0.85 vs QBTS's 3.28
NVDA is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 65.5%, EPS growth 66.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 100.0%
- 243.2% 10Y total return vs INTC's 350.5%
- PEG 0.27 vs IBM's 1.49
- 55.6% margin vs QBTS's -14.4%
INTC is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +494.7% vs IBM's -6.3%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 178.5% revenue growth vs INTC's -0.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (18.5x vs 116.5x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 55.6% margin vs QBTS's -14.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.85 vs QBTS's 3.28 | |
| Dividends | 2.9% yield, 30-year raise streak, vs NVDA's 0.0%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +494.7% vs IBM's -6.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 58.1% ROA vs QBTS's -38.8%, ROIC 81.8% vs -102.0% |
QBTS vs IBM vs MSFT vs NVDA vs INTC — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
QBTS vs IBM vs MSFT vs NVDA vs INTC — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
NVDA leads in 2 of 6 categories
IBM leads 2 • QBTS leads 0 • MSFT leads 0 • INTC leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NVDA leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MSFT is the larger business by revenue, generating $318.3B annually — 12944.8x QBTS's $25M. NVDA is the more profitable business, keeping 55.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to QBTS's -14.4%. On growth, NVDA holds the edge at +73.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $25M | $68.9B | $318.3B | $215.9B | $53.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$99M | $15.1B | $192.6B | $133.2B | $4.0B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$355M | $10.8B | $125.2B | $120.1B | -$3.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$76M | $13.1B | $72.9B | $96.7B | -$3.1B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +82.6% | +59.0% | +68.3% | +71.1% | +35.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -4.1% | +16.4% | +46.8% | +60.4% | -9.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -14.4% | +15.6% | +39.3% | +55.6% | -5.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -3.1% | +19.0% | +22.9% | +44.8% | -5.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +19.2% | +9.5% | +18.3% | +73.2% | +7.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +67.6% | +14.3% | +23.4% | +97.8% | -2.8% |
Valuation Metrics
IBM leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 20.6x trailing earnings, IBM trades at a 53% valuation discount to NVDA's 43.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), NVDA offers better value at 0.46x vs IBM's 1.66x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $8.0B | $215.5B | $3.08T | $5.23T | $627.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $7.4B | $269.0B | $3.17T | $5.23T | $659.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -20.31x | 20.57x | 30.43x | 43.92x | -2120.46x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 18.47x | 24.77x | 26.00x | 116.47x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.66x | 1.62x | 0.46x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 17.53x | 19.46x | 39.27x | 56.44x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 326.04x | 3.19x | 10.94x | 24.22x | 11.87x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 8.50x | 6.66x | 9.02x | 33.43x | 4.80x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 18.62x | 43.06x | 54.10x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
NVDA leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
NVDA delivers a 76.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $76 in annual profit, vs $-42 for QBTS. QBTS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to IBM's 2.05x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MSFT scores 6/9 vs NVDA's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -41.7% | +35.4% | +33.1% | +76.3% | -2.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -38.8% | +7.1% | +19.2% | +58.1% | -1.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -102.0% | +9.8% | +24.9% | +81.8% | -0.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -18.9% | +9.5% | +29.7% | +97.2% | -0.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 4 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.01x | 2.05x | 0.33x | 0.07x | 0.37x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$628M | $53.5B | $81.9B | $807M | $32.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $635M | $13.6B | $30.2B | $10.6B | $14.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $8M | $67.2B | $112.2B | $11.4B | $46.6B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 6.41x | 55.65x | 545.03x | 3.71x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — QBTS and NVDA and INTC each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in NVDA five years ago would be worth $150,908 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $17,377 for MSFT. Over the past 12 months, INTC leads with a +494.7% total return vs IBM's -6.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors QBTS at 2.8% vs MSFT's 11.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -19.9% | -20.0% | -12.0% | +14.0% | +217.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +116.4% | -6.3% | -4.5% | +83.4% | +494.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +5314.3% | +103.8% | +37.6% | +638.6% | +307.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +128.9% | +88.3% | +73.8% | +1409.1% | +129.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +122.1% | +108.0% | +776.0% | +24324.1% | +350.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +2.8% | +26.8% | +11.2% | +94.7% | +59.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MSFT and NVDA each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MSFT is the less volatile stock with a 0.85 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than QBTS's 3.28 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. NVDA currently trades 98.8% from its 52-week high vs QBTS's 48.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 3.28x | 1.00x | 0.85x | 1.74x | 2.27x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $46.75 | $324.90 | $555.45 | $217.80 | $130.57 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $7.71 | $220.72 | $356.28 | $115.21 | $18.97 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +48.2% | +70.7% | +74.7% | +98.8% | +95.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 60.5 | 43.9 | 57.9 | 63.4 | 80.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 24.6M | 5.3M | 32.5M | 160.0M | 113.6M |
Analyst Outlook
IBM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: QBTS as "Buy", IBM as "Hold", MSFT as "Buy", NVDA as "Buy", INTC as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 71.1% upside for QBTS (target: $39) vs -36.3% for INTC (target: $80). For income investors, IBM offers the higher dividend yield at 2.87% vs MSFT's 0.78%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $38.57 | $309.64 | $556.88 | $275.74 | $79.55 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 13 | 50 | 81 | 79 | 84 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +2.9% | +0.8% | +0.0% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 30 | 19 | 2 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $6.59 | $3.23 | $0.04 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.5% | 0.0% | +0.6% | +0.8% | 0.0% |
NVDA leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). IBM leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). 2 tied.
QBTS vs IBM vs MSFT vs NVDA vs INTC: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is QBTS or IBM or MSFT or NVDA or INTC a better buy right now?
For growth investors, D-Wave Quantum Inc.
(QBTS) is the stronger pick with 178. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -0. 5% for Intel Corporation (INTC). International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) offers the better valuation at 20. 6x trailing P/E (18. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate D-Wave Quantum Inc. (QBTS) a "Buy" — based on 13 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 — QBTS or IBM or MSFT or NVDA or INTC?
On trailing P/E, International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) is the cheapest at 20.
6x versus NVIDIA Corporation at 43. 9x. On forward P/E, International Business Machines Corporation is actually cheaper at 18. 5x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: NVIDIA Corporation wins at 0. 27x versus International Business Machines Corporation's 1. 49x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — QBTS or IBM or MSFT or NVDA or INTC?
Over the past 5 years, NVIDIA Corporation (NVDA) delivered a total return of +1409%, compared to +73.
8% for Microsoft Corporation (MSFT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NVDA returned +243. 2% versus IBM's +108. 0%. 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 — QBTS or IBM or MSFT or NVDA or INTC?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
85β versus D-Wave Quantum Inc. 's 3. 28β — meaning QBTS is approximately 284% more volatile than MSFT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, D-Wave Quantum Inc. (QBTS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 2% for International Business Machines Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — QBTS or IBM or MSFT or NVDA or INTC?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), D-Wave Quantum Inc.
(QBTS) is pulling ahead at 178. 5% versus -0. 5% for Intel Corporation (INTC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Intel Corporation grew EPS 98. 7% year-over-year, compared to -48. 0% for D-Wave Quantum Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, NVDA leads at 100. 0% 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 — QBTS or IBM or MSFT or NVDA or INTC?
NVIDIA Corporation (NVDA) is the more profitable company, earning 55.
6% net margin versus -1444. 1% for D-Wave Quantum Inc. — meaning it keeps 55. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NVDA leads at 60. 4% versus -408. 2% for QBTS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — QBTS leads at 82. 6%, 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 QBTS or IBM or MSFT or NVDA or INTC 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, NVIDIA Corporation (NVDA) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 27x versus International Business Machines Corporation's 1. 49x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) trades at 18. 5x forward P/E versus 116. 5x for Intel Corporation — 98. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for QBTS: 71. 1% to $38. 57.
08Which pays a better dividend — QBTS or IBM or MSFT or NVDA or INTC?
In this comparison, IBM (2.
9% yield), MSFT (0. 8% yield) pay a dividend. QBTS, NVDA, INTC do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is QBTS or IBM or MSFT or NVDA or INTC 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.
85), 0. 8% yield, +776. 0% 10Y return). D-Wave Quantum Inc. (QBTS) carries a higher beta of 3. 28 — 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: +776. 0%, QBTS: +122. 1%), 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 QBTS and IBM and MSFT and NVDA and INTC?
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: QBTS is a small-cap high-growth stock; IBM is a large-cap quality compounder stock; MSFT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; NVDA is a mega-cap high-growth stock; INTC is a large-cap quality compounder stock. IBM, MSFT pay a dividend while QBTS, NVDA, INTC 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.