Software - Application
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
RNG vs LUMN vs OOMA vs CSCO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Telecommunications Services
Telecommunications Services
Communication Equipment
RNG vs LUMN vs OOMA vs CSCO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Software - Application | Telecommunications Services | Telecommunications Services | Communication Equipment |
| Market Cap | $4.06B | $8.71B | $517M | $364.95B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $2.55B | $12.12B | $274M | $59.05B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $84M | $-1.74B | $6M | $11.08B |
| Gross Margin | 71.6% | 35.2% | 61.1% | 64.4% |
| Operating Margin | 6.5% | -2.6% | 1.9% | 23.0% |
| Forward P/E | 9.4x | — | 14.8x | 22.2x |
| Total Debt | $1.48B | $17.71B | $17M | $29.64B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $133M | $1.00B | $20M | $9.47B |
RNG vs LUMN vs OOMA vs CSCO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| RingCentral, Inc. (RNG) | 100 | 16.6 | -83.4% |
| Lumen Technologies,… (LUMN) | 100 | 86.1 | -13.9% |
| Ooma, Inc. (OOMA) | 100 | 151.5 | +51.5% |
| Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) | 100 | 192.7 | +92.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: RNG vs LUMN vs OOMA vs CSCO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
RNG is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if value is your priority.
- Lower P/E (9.4x vs 22.2x)
LUMN is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +100.0% vs OOMA's +48.7%
OOMA is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 6.5%, EPS growth 188.5%, 3Y rev CAGR 8.2%
- 6.5% revenue growth vs LUMN's -5.4%
CSCO carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.92, yield 1.7%
- 301.7% 10Y total return vs OOMA's 194.6%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.92, Low D/E 63.3%, current ratio 1.00x
- Beta 0.92, yield 1.7%, current ratio 1.00x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 6.5% revenue growth vs LUMN's -5.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (9.4x vs 22.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 18.8% margin vs LUMN's -14.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.92 vs LUMN's 2.74 | |
| Dividends | 1.7% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs LUMN's 0.0%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +100.0% vs OOMA's +48.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 9.0% ROA vs LUMN's -5.3%, ROIC 13.0% vs -0.8% |
RNG vs LUMN vs OOMA vs CSCO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
RNG vs LUMN vs OOMA vs CSCO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
LUMN leads in 2 of 6 categories
CSCO leads 2 • RNG leads 0 • OOMA leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — RNG and CSCO each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CSCO is the larger business by revenue, generating $59.1B annually — 215.8x OOMA's $274M. CSCO is the more profitable business, keeping 18.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to LUMN's -14.3%. On growth, OOMA holds the edge at +14.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $2.5B | $12.1B | $274M | $59.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $376M | $2.4B | $20M | $16.1B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $84M | -$1.7B | $6M | $11.1B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $664M | $5.4B | -$42M | $12.8B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +71.6% | +35.2% | +61.1% | +64.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +6.5% | -2.6% | +1.9% | +23.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +3.3% | -14.3% | +2.4% | +18.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +26.0% | +44.9% | -15.3% | +21.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +5.3% | -8.9% | +14.6% | +9.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +4.2% | 0.0% | — | +29.5% |
Valuation Metrics
LUMN leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 36.1x trailing earnings, CSCO trades at a 62% valuation discount to RNG's 94.6x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, LUMN's 9.9x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than OOMA's 27.7x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $4.1B | $8.7B | $517M | $365.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $5.4B | $25.4B | $514M | $385.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 94.56x | -4.83x | 82.61x | 36.14x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 9.36x | — | 14.78x | 22.18x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 13.83x | 9.91x | 27.66x | 26.34x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.61x | 0.70x | 1.89x | 6.44x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | — | 5.69x | 7.87x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 6.92x | 23.49x | — | 27.46x |
Profitability & Efficiency
CSCO leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CSCO delivers a 23.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $23 in annual profit, vs $-79 for LUMN. OOMA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.19x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CSCO's 0.63x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CSCO scores 8/9 vs LUMN's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | -79.4% | +7.2% | +23.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +5.6% | -5.3% | +3.8% | +9.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +12.2% | -0.8% | +3.7% | +13.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +19.5% | -0.6% | +3.4% | +13.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 4 | 6 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | — | 0.19x | 0.63x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.3B | $16.7B | -$3M | $20.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $133M | $1.0B | $20M | $9.5B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.5B | $17.7B | $17M | $29.6B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 3.57x | -1.12x | — | 9.64x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LUMN leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CSCO five years ago would be worth $18,718 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,769 for RNG. Over the past 12 months, LUMN leads with a +100.0% total return vs OOMA's +48.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors LUMN at 54.4% vs OOMA's 17.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +64.8% | +10.0% | +70.6% | +22.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +74.3% | +100.0% | +48.7% | +57.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +70.3% | +267.8% | +60.9% | +109.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -82.3% | -28.8% | +15.9% | +87.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +144.3% | -35.7% | +194.6% | +301.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +19.4% | +54.4% | +17.2% | +27.9% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — OOMA and CSCO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CSCO is the less volatile stock with a 0.92 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LUMN's 2.74 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. OOMA currently trades 98.7% from its 52-week high vs LUMN's 70.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.58x | 2.74x | 1.01x | 0.92x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $48.57 | $11.95 | $19.26 | $94.72 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $23.59 | $3.37 | $9.79 | $59.07 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +93.5% | +70.8% | +98.7% | +97.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 64.0 | 73.4 | 82.2 | 63.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.8M | 12.5M | 266K | 18.9M |
Analyst Outlook
CSCO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: RNG as "Buy", LUMN as "Hold", OOMA as "Buy", CSCO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 4.7% upside for CSCO (target: $97) vs -17.0% for RNG (target: $38). CSCO is the only dividend payer here at 1.75% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $37.67 | $7.08 | $18.00 | $96.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 42 | 28 | 15 | 73 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.0% | — | +1.7% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | — | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.00 | — | $1.61 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +8.2% | 0.0% | +3.2% | +2.0% |
LUMN leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Total Returns). CSCO leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Analyst Outlook). 2 tied.
RNG vs LUMN vs OOMA vs CSCO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is RNG or LUMN or OOMA or CSCO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Ooma, Inc.
(OOMA) is the stronger pick with 6. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -5. 4% for Lumen Technologies, Inc. (LUMN). Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) offers the better valuation at 36. 1x trailing P/E (22. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate RingCentral, Inc. (RNG) a "Buy" — based on 42 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 — RNG or LUMN or OOMA or CSCO?
On trailing P/E, Cisco Systems, Inc.
(CSCO) is the cheapest at 36. 1x versus RingCentral, Inc. at 94. 6x. On forward P/E, RingCentral, Inc. is actually cheaper at 9. 4x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — RNG or LUMN or OOMA or CSCO?
Over the past 5 years, Cisco Systems, Inc.
(CSCO) delivered a total return of +87. 2%, compared to -82. 3% for RingCentral, Inc. (RNG). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CSCO returned +301. 7% versus LUMN's -35. 7%. 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 — RNG or LUMN or OOMA or CSCO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Cisco Systems, Inc.
(CSCO) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 92β versus Lumen Technologies, Inc. 's 2. 74β — meaning LUMN is approximately 198% more volatile than CSCO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Ooma, Inc. (OOMA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 19% versus 63% for Cisco Systems, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — RNG or LUMN or OOMA or CSCO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Ooma, Inc.
(OOMA) is pulling ahead at 6. 5% versus -5. 4% for Lumen Technologies, Inc. (LUMN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Ooma, Inc. grew EPS 188. 5% year-over-year, compared to -30. 4% for Lumen Technologies, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, OOMA leads at 8. 2% 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 — RNG or LUMN or OOMA or CSCO?
Cisco Systems, Inc.
(CSCO) is the more profitable company, earning 18. 0% net margin versus -14. 0% for Lumen Technologies, Inc. — meaning it keeps 18. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CSCO leads at 20. 8% versus -1. 5% for LUMN. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — RNG leads at 71. 2%, 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 RNG or LUMN or OOMA or CSCO more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, RingCentral, Inc.
(RNG) trades at 9. 4x forward P/E versus 22. 2x for Cisco Systems, Inc. — 12. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CSCO: 4. 7% to $96. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — RNG or LUMN or OOMA or CSCO?
In this comparison, CSCO (1.
7% yield) pays a dividend. RNG, LUMN, OOMA do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is RNG or LUMN or OOMA or CSCO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Cisco Systems, Inc.
(CSCO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 92), 1. 7% yield, +301. 7% 10Y return). Lumen Technologies, Inc. (LUMN) carries a higher beta of 2. 74 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (CSCO: +301. 7%, LUMN: -35. 7%), 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 RNG and LUMN and OOMA and CSCO?
These companies operate in different sectors (RNG (Technology) and LUMN (Communication Services) and OOMA (Communication Services) and CSCO (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
CSCO pays a dividend while RNG, LUMN, OOMA 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.
- Sector: Communication Services
- Market Cap > $100B
- Revenue Growth > 7%
- Gross Margin > 36%
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.