Comprehensive Stock Comparison
Compare QVC Group Inc. (QVCGA) vs Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA) Stock
Analyze side-by-side fundamentals, valuation, growth, and profitability to decide which stock is the better buy.
Selected Stocks
Add up to 10 tickers. Use presets or search to get started.
Quick Verdict
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | BABA | 5.9% revenue growth vs QVCGA's -8.0% |
| Value | QVCGA | Better valuation composite |
| Quality / Margins | BABA | 12.2% net margin vs QVCGA's -38.8% |
| Stability / Safety | BABA | Beta 0.90 vs QVCGA's 0.93 |
| Dividends | QVCGA | 16.7% yield, vs BABA's 1.2% |
| Momentum (1Y) | BABA | +10.2% vs QVCGA's -81.9% |
| Efficiency (ROA) | BABA | 6.5% ROA vs QVCGA's -48.8%, ROIC 9.6% vs -13.3% |
Who Each Stock Is For
Income & stability
Growth exposure
Long-term compounding (10Y)
Sleep-well-at-night portfolio
Defensive / Recession hedge
Business Model
What each company does and how it makes money
QVC Group is a video commerce retailer that sells products directly to consumers through live television broadcasts, digital streaming, and online platforms. It generates revenue primarily from merchandise sales — with segments including QVC US, QVC International, and HSN — supplemented by advertising and shipping fees. The company's moat lies in its unique interactive shopping format that combines entertainment with commerce, creating an engaging customer experience that traditional e-commerce lacks.
Alibaba is a Chinese e-commerce and technology conglomerate that operates digital marketplaces connecting buyers and sellers. It generates revenue primarily from its core commerce segments — China Commerce (~65%) and International Commerce (~10%) — along with cloud services (~10%) and logistics through Cainiao. Its key competitive advantage is its massive ecosystem network effect, where its platforms like Taobao and Tmall create a self-reinforcing cycle of merchants and consumers that's difficult for competitors to replicate.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Financial Metrics Comparison
Side-by-side fundamentals across 2 stocks. BestLagging
Financial Scorecard
BABA leads in 4 of 6 categories (Financial Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). QVCGA leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
Financial Metrics (TTM)
BABA is the larger business by revenue, generating $1.01T annually — 106.6x QVCGA's $9.5B. BABA is the more profitable business, keeping 12.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to QVCGA's -38.8%. On growth, BABA holds the edge at +4.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | QVCGAQVC Group Inc. | BABAAlibaba Group Hol… |
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $9.5B | $1.01T |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$3.1B | $114.6B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$3.7B | $123.4B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $20M | $2.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +34.4% | +41.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -36.5% | +10.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -38.8% | +12.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +0.2% | +0.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -5.6% | +4.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -2.4% | -52.0% |
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | QVCGAQVC Group Inc. | BABAAlibaba Group Hol… |
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $550,344 | $2.66T |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $4.7B | $2.67T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.02x | 18.44x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 3.42x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 104.23x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.00x | 18.33x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 2.19x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 0.00x | 233.68x |
Profitability & Efficiency
On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), BABA scores 7/9 vs QVCGA's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | QVCGAQVC Group Inc. | BABAAlibaba Group Hol… |
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | +11.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -48.8% | +6.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -13.3% | +9.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -10.6% | +10.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.23x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $4.7B | $66.8B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $905M | $181.7B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $5.6B | $248.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.07x | 15.74x |
Total Returns (with DRIP)
A $10,000 investment in BABA five years ago would be worth $6,154 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,190 for QVCGA. Over the past 12 months, BABA leads with a +10.2% total return vs QVCGA's -81.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors BABA at 19.2% vs QVCGA's -46.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | QVCGAQVC Group Inc. | BABAAlibaba Group Hol… |
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -73.5% | -7.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -81.9% | +10.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -84.5% | +69.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -78.1% | -38.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +691.1% | +116.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -46.3% | +19.2% |
Risk & Volatility
BABA is the less volatile stock with a 0.90 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than QVCGA's 0.93 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. BABA currently trades 74.8% from its 52-week high vs QVCGA's 16.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | QVCGAQVC Group Inc. | BABAAlibaba Group Hol… |
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.93x | 0.90x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $18.51 | $192.67 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $2.27 | $95.73 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +16.3% | +74.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 28.0 | 33.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 118K | 10.2M |
Analyst Outlook
For income investors, QVCGA offers the higher dividend yield at 16.72% vs BABA's 1.23%.
| Metric | QVCGAQVC Group Inc. | BABAAlibaba Group Hol… |
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $188.62 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 58 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +16.7% | +1.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.51 | $12.14 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +100.0% | +0.5% |
Historical Charts
Charts are rendered on first load. Hover for details.
Chart 1Total Return — 5 Years (Rebased to 100)
| Stock | Jan 25 | Feb 26 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| QVC Group Inc. (QVCGA) | 100 | 56.72 | -43.3% |
| Alibaba Group Holdi… (BABA) | 100 | 170.76 | +70.8% |
Alibaba Group Holdi… (BABA) returned -38% over 5 years vs QVC Group Inc. (QVCGA)'s -78%.
Chart 2Revenue Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| QVC Group Inc. (QVCGA) | $10.6B | $10.0B | -5.7% |
| Alibaba Group Holdi… (BABA) | $101.1B | $996.3B | +885.1% |
Alibaba Group Holding Limited's revenue grew from $101.1B (2016) to $996.3B (2025) — a 28.9% CAGR.
Chart 3Net Margin Trend — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| QVC Group Inc. (QVCGA) | 11.6% | -12.9% | -210.8% |
| Alibaba Group Holdi… (BABA) | 70.7% | 13.1% | -81.5% |
Alibaba Group Holding Limited's net margin went from 71% (2016) to 13% (2025).
Chart 4P/E Ratio History — 9 Years
| Stock | 2017 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alibaba Group Holdi… (BABA) | 8.8 | 2.7 | -69.3% |
Alibaba Group Holding Limited has traded in a 2x–9x P/E range over 9 years; current trailing P/E is ~18x.
Chart 5EPS Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| QVC Group Inc. (QVCGA) | -2.87 | -162.88 | -5575.3% |
| Alibaba Group Holdi… (BABA) | 34 | 53.6 | +57.6% |
Alibaba Group Holding Limited's EPS grew from $34.00 (2016) to $53.60 (2025) — a 5% CAGR.
Chart 6Free Cash Flow — 5 Years
QVC Group Inc. generated $289M FCF in 2024 (-64% vs 2021). Alibaba Group Holding Limited generated $78B FCF in 2025 (-57% vs 2021).
QVCGA vs BABA: Frequently Asked Questions
7 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is QVCGA or BABA a better buy right now?
Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA) offers the better valuation at 18.4x trailing P/E (3.4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA) a "Buy" — based on 58 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 is the better long-term investment — QVCGA or BABA?
Over the past 5 years, Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA) delivered a total return of -38.5%, compared to -78.1% for QVC Group Inc. (QVCGA). A $10,000 investment in BABA five years ago would be worth approximately $6K today (assuming dividends reinvested). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: QVCGA returned +691.1% versus BABA's +116.1%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — QVCGA or BABA?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA) is the lower-risk stock at 0.90β versus QVC Group Inc.'s 0.93β — meaning QVCGA is approximately 4% more volatile than BABA relative to the S&P 500.
04Which has better profit margins — QVCGA or BABA?
Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA) is the more profitable company, earning 13.1% net margin versus -12.9% for QVC Group Inc. — meaning it keeps 13.1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: BABA leads at 14.1% versus -8.1% for QVCGA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BABA leads at 40.0%, 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.
05Which pays a better dividend — QVCGA or BABA?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends. QVC Group Inc. (QVCGA) offers the highest yield at 16.7%, versus 1.2% for Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA).
06Is QVCGA or BABA better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, QVC Group Inc. (QVCGA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.93), 16.7% yield, +691.1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (QVCGA: +691.1%, BABA: +116.1%), 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.
07What are the main differences between QVCGA and BABA?
Both stocks operate in the Consumer Cyclical sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both. In terms of investment character: QVCGA is a small-cap income-oriented stock; BABA is a mega-cap quality compounder 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 beat both.