Semiconductors
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
SLAB vs FORM vs MPWR vs AMAT vs LRCX
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Semiconductors
Semiconductors
Semiconductors
Semiconductors
SLAB vs FORM vs MPWR vs AMAT vs LRCX — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Semiconductors | Semiconductors | Semiconductors | Semiconductors | Semiconductors |
| Market Cap | $7.17B | $11.28B | $77.41B | $325.54B | $357.66B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $785M | $840M | $2.79B | $28.37B | $21.68B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-65M | $68M | $616M | $7.00B | $6.71B |
| Gross Margin | 58.2% | 42.1% | 55.2% | 48.7% | 50.0% |
| Operating Margin | -9.0% | 12.7% | 26.1% | 29.2% | 34.3% |
| Forward P/E | 80.4x | 66.5x | 73.1x | 37.1x | 50.7x |
| Total Debt | $0.00 | $45M | $24M | $6.55B | $4.76B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $364M | $103M | $1.10B | $7.24B | $6.39B |
SLAB vs FORM vs MPWR vs AMAT vs LRCX — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Silicon Laboratorie… (SLAB) | 100 | 232.4 | +132.4% |
| FormFactor, Inc. (FORM) | 100 | 574.8 | +474.8% |
| Monolithic Power Sy… (MPWR) | 100 | 751.4 | +651.4% |
| Applied Materials, … (AMAT) | 100 | 730.7 | +630.7% |
| Lam Research Corpor… (LRCX) | 100 | 1046.4 | +946.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SLAB vs FORM vs MPWR vs AMAT vs LRCX
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
SLAB has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure.
- Rev growth 34.3%, EPS growth 66.6%, 3Y rev CAGR -8.5%
- 34.3% revenue growth vs FORM's 2.8%
- Beta 1.25 vs LRCX's 2.54
FORM is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 2.02, Low D/E 4.3%, current ratio 4.50x
- +387.8% vs SLAB's +100.3%
MPWR is the clearest fit if your priority is defensive.
- Beta 2.28, yield 0.4%, current ratio 5.91x
AMAT is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and valuation efficiency is your priority.
- Dividend streak 8 yrs, beta 2.14, yield 0.4%
- PEG 2.16 vs MPWR's 2.48
- Lower P/E (37.1x vs 50.7x), PEG 2.16 vs 2.26
- 0.4% yield, 8-year raise streak, vs LRCX's 0.3%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
LRCX ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding.
- 38.2% 10Y total return vs MPWR's 24.9%
- 30.9% margin vs SLAB's -8.3%
- 31.4% ROA vs SLAB's -5.1%, ROIC 55.7% vs -6.9%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 34.3% revenue growth vs FORM's 2.8% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (37.1x vs 50.7x), PEG 2.16 vs 2.26 | |
| Quality / Margins | 30.9% margin vs SLAB's -8.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.25 vs LRCX's 2.54 | |
| Dividends | 0.4% yield, 8-year raise streak, vs LRCX's 0.3%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +387.8% vs SLAB's +100.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 31.4% ROA vs SLAB's -5.1%, ROIC 55.7% vs -6.9% |
SLAB vs FORM vs MPWR vs AMAT vs LRCX — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
SLAB vs FORM vs MPWR vs AMAT 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 3 of 6 categories
AMAT leads 1 • SLAB leads 1 • FORM leads 0 • MPWR leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LRCX leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AMAT is the larger business by revenue, generating $28.4B annually — 36.1x SLAB's $785M. LRCX is the more profitable business, keeping 30.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to SLAB's -8.3%. On growth, FORM holds the edge at +32.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $785M | $840M | $2.8B | $28.4B | $21.7B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$32M | $152M | $781M | $8.4B | $7.8B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$65M | $68M | $616M | $7.0B | $6.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $66M | -$5M | $664M | $5.7B | $6.5B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +58.2% | +42.1% | +55.2% | +48.7% | +50.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -9.0% | +12.7% | +26.1% | +29.2% | +34.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -8.3% | +8.1% | +22.1% | +24.7% | +30.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +8.4% | -0.6% | +23.8% | +20.1% | +29.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +25.2% | +32.0% | +20.8% | -3.5% | +23.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +88.8% | +2.2% | -88.4% | +13.9% | +40.8% |
Valuation Metrics
AMAT leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 47.4x trailing earnings, AMAT trades at a 77% valuation discount to FORM's 209.7x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), AMAT offers better value at 2.76x vs MPWR's 4.19x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $7.2B | $11.3B | $77.4B | $325.5B | $357.7B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $6.8B | $11.2B | $76.3B | $324.9B | $356.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -109.92x | 209.68x | 123.60x | 47.40x | 69.01x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 80.41x | 66.48x | 73.12x | 37.07x | 50.65x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 4.19x | 2.76x | 3.08x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 100.94x | 97.90x | 38.68x | 56.63x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 9.14x | 14.37x | 27.74x | 11.48x | 19.40x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 6.51x | 10.94x | 21.56x | 16.25x | 37.47x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 109.03x | 960.69x | 116.20x | 57.13x | 66.06x |
Profitability & Efficiency
LRCX leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LRCX delivers a 65.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $66 in annual profit, vs $-6 for SLAB. MPWR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to LRCX's 0.48x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), LRCX scores 8/9 vs FORM's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -5.9% | +6.7% | +17.9% | +34.3% | +65.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -5.1% | +5.6% | +15.2% | +19.3% | +31.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -6.9% | +5.4% | +22.2% | +33.3% | +55.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -6.3% | +6.1% | +20.4% | +30.6% | +40.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 4 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.04x | 0.01x | 0.32x | 0.48x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$364M | -$58M | -$1.1B | -$686M | -$1.6B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $364M | $103M | $1.1B | $7.2B | $6.4B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $0 | $45M | $24M | $6.6B | $4.8B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -58.63x | 252.69x | — | 35.46x | 58.92x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LRCX leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MPWR five years ago would be worth $46,617 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $16,095 for SLAB. Over the past 12 months, FORM leads with a +387.8% total return vs SLAB's +100.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors LRCX at 76.4% vs SLAB's 16.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +65.0% | +144.4% | +68.5% | +52.9% | +54.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +100.3% | +387.8% | +148.6% | +164.7% | +282.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +59.0% | +417.3% | +280.3% | +258.7% | +448.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +61.0% | +273.9% | +366.2% | +213.8% | +360.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +375.0% | +1952.2% | +2494.7% | +2014.4% | +3815.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +16.7% | +72.9% | +56.1% | +53.1% | +76.4% |
Risk & Volatility
SLAB leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
SLAB is the less volatile stock with a 1.25 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LRCX's 2.54 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. SLAB currently trades 99.5% from its 52-week high vs FORM's 90.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.25x | 2.02x | 2.28x | 2.14x | 2.54x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $218.66 | $159.09 | $1662.00 | $432.81 | $298.00 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $106.01 | $26.08 | $613.00 | $151.51 | $72.91 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +99.5% | +90.9% | +94.8% | +94.8% | +96.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 66.1 | 66.5 | 71.0 | 66.3 | 69.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 465K | 1.6M | 577K | 6.0M | 9.7M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — AMAT and LRCX each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: SLAB as "Buy", FORM as "Hold", MPWR as "Buy", AMAT as "Buy", LRCX as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 3.9% upside for AMAT (target: $426) vs -14.7% for FORM (target: $123). For income investors, AMAT offers the higher dividend yield at 0.42% vs LRCX's 0.31%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $211.60 | $123.38 | $1615.00 | $426.39 | $290.65 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 37 | 19 | 25 | 53 | 50 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +0.4% | +0.4% | +0.3% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 8 | 8 | 11 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $5.90 | $1.71 | $0.89 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.2% | +0.0% | +1.5% | +1.0% |
LRCX leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). AMAT leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
SLAB vs FORM vs MPWR vs AMAT vs LRCX: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SLAB or FORM or MPWR or AMAT or LRCX a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Silicon Laboratories Inc.
(SLAB) is the stronger pick with 34. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 2. 8% for FormFactor, Inc. (FORM). Applied Materials, Inc. (AMAT) offers the better valuation at 47. 4x trailing P/E (37. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Silicon Laboratories Inc. (SLAB) a "Buy" — based on 37 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 — SLAB or FORM or MPWR or AMAT or LRCX?
On trailing P/E, Applied Materials, Inc.
(AMAT) is the cheapest at 47. 4x versus FormFactor, Inc. at 209. 7x. On forward P/E, Applied Materials, Inc. is actually cheaper at 37. 1x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Applied Materials, Inc. wins at 2. 16x versus Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. 's 2. 48x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — SLAB or FORM or MPWR or AMAT or LRCX?
Over the past 5 years, Monolithic Power Systems, Inc.
(MPWR) delivered a total return of +366. 2%, compared to +61. 0% for Silicon Laboratories Inc. (SLAB). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LRCX returned +38. 2% versus SLAB's +375. 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 — SLAB or FORM or MPWR or AMAT or LRCX?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Silicon Laboratories Inc.
(SLAB) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 25β versus Lam Research Corporation's 2. 54β — meaning LRCX is approximately 103% more volatile than SLAB relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. (MPWR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 48% for Lam Research Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — SLAB or FORM or MPWR or AMAT or LRCX?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Silicon Laboratories Inc.
(SLAB) is pulling ahead at 34. 3% versus 2. 8% for FormFactor, Inc. (FORM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Silicon Laboratories Inc. grew EPS 66. 6% year-over-year, compared to -65. 2% for Monolithic Power Systems, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, MPWR leads at 15. 9% 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 — SLAB or FORM or MPWR or AMAT or LRCX?
Lam Research Corporation (LRCX) is the more profitable company, earning 29.
1% net margin versus -8. 3% for Silicon Laboratories Inc. — meaning it keeps 29. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LRCX leads at 32. 0% versus -9. 0% for SLAB. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — SLAB leads at 58. 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 SLAB or FORM or MPWR or AMAT 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, Applied Materials, Inc. (AMAT) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 2. 16x versus Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. 's 2. 48x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Applied Materials, Inc. (AMAT) trades at 37. 1x forward P/E versus 80. 4x for Silicon Laboratories Inc. — 43. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for AMAT: 3. 9% to $426. 39.
08Which pays a better dividend — SLAB or FORM or MPWR or AMAT or LRCX?
In this comparison, AMAT (0.
4% yield), MPWR (0. 4% yield), LRCX (0. 3% yield) pay a dividend. SLAB, FORM do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is SLAB or FORM or MPWR or AMAT or LRCX better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, FormFactor, Inc.
(FORM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (+1952% 10Y return). Applied Materials, Inc. (AMAT) carries a higher beta of 2. 14 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (FORM: +1952%, AMAT: +20. 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 SLAB and FORM and MPWR and AMAT 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: SLAB is a small-cap high-growth stock; FORM is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; MPWR is a mid-cap high-growth stock; AMAT is a large-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.