Electronic Gaming & Multimedia
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
SOHU vs NTES vs BIDU vs IQ vs BILI
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Electronic Gaming & Multimedia
Internet Content & Information
Entertainment
Electronic Gaming & Multimedia
SOHU vs NTES vs BIDU vs IQ vs BILI — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Electronic Gaming & Multimedia | Electronic Gaming & Multimedia | Internet Content & Information | Entertainment | Electronic Gaming & Multimedia |
| Market Cap | $475M | $74.15B | $48.92B | $1.18B | $7.32B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $577M | $112.25B | $130.46B | $27.11B | $29.38B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $149M | $33.67B | $9.00B | $-390M | $220M |
| Gross Margin | 76.9% | 64.3% | 44.7% | 21.9% | 35.9% |
| Operating Margin | -9.2% | 31.8% | -2.6% | 1.7% | 1.1% |
| Forward P/E | — | 1.9x | 2.6x | 4.8x | 3.1x |
| Total Debt | $38M | $6.39B | $79.32B | $14.19B | $5.15B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $160M | $51.52B | $24.83B | $3.53B | $10.25B |
SOHU vs NTES vs BIDU vs IQ vs BILI — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sohu.com Limited (SOHU) | 100 | 235.8 | +135.8% |
| NetEase, Inc. (NTES) | 100 | 152.9 | +52.9% |
| Baidu, Inc. (BIDU) | 100 | 131.3 | +31.3% |
| iQIYI, Inc. (IQ) | 100 | 7.3 | -92.7% |
| Bilibili Inc. (BILI) | 100 | 67.8 | -32.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SOHU vs NTES vs BIDU vs IQ vs BILI
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
SOHU is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night and defensive is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.71, Low D/E 4.1%, current ratio 3.24x
- Beta 0.71, current ratio 3.24x
- Beta 0.71 vs BILI's 1.77, lower leverage
NTES carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 4 yrs, beta 0.74, yield 2.6%
- 375.8% 10Y total return vs BILI's 95.6%
- Lower P/E (1.9x vs 3.1x)
- 30.0% margin vs IQ's -1.4%
BIDU ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.04 vs NTES's 0.08
- +61.3% vs IQ's -36.0%
Among these 5 stocks, IQ doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
BILI is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 19.1%, EPS growth 72.3%, 3Y rev CAGR 11.4%
- 19.1% revenue growth vs IQ's -8.3%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 19.1% revenue growth vs IQ's -8.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (1.9x vs 3.1x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 30.0% margin vs IQ's -1.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.71 vs BILI's 1.77, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.6% yield; 4-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +61.3% vs IQ's -36.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 15.2% ROA vs IQ's -0.9%, ROIC 23.3% vs 5.8% |
SOHU vs NTES vs BIDU vs IQ vs BILI — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
SOHU vs NTES vs BIDU vs IQ vs BILI — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
NTES leads in 4 of 6 categories
IQ leads 1 • SOHU leads 1 • BIDU leads 0 • BILI leads 0
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NTES leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
BIDU is the larger business by revenue, generating $130.5B annually — 225.9x SOHU's $577M. NTES is the more profitable business, keeping 30.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to IQ's -1.4%. On growth, BILI holds the edge at +19.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $577M | $112.2B | $130.5B | $27.1B | $29.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$22M | $38.0B | $4.9B | $6.3B | $845M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $149M | $33.7B | $9.0B | -$390M | $220M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $0 | $48.5B | -$15.7B | $466M | $3.3B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +76.9% | +64.3% | +44.7% | +21.9% | +35.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -9.2% | +31.8% | -2.6% | +1.7% | +1.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +25.9% | +30.0% | +6.9% | -1.4% | +0.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -11.4% | +43.2% | -12.0% | +1.7% | +11.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +18.7% | +1.6% | -7.1% | -7.8% | +19.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +161.5% | -30.4% | -2.6% | -2.1% | +134.9% |
Valuation Metrics
IQ leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 10.7x trailing earnings, IQ trades at a 32% valuation discount to NTES's 15.6x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), BIDU offers better value at 0.24x vs NTES's 0.67x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $475M | $74.2B | $48.9B | $1.2B | $7.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $353M | $67.5B | $56.9B | $2.7B | $6.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -5.05x | 15.63x | 14.44x | 10.69x | -46.31x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 1.86x | 2.58x | 4.83x | 3.06x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.67x | 0.24x | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 12.40x | 10.79x | 10.27x | 38.62x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.79x | 4.61x | 2.50x | 0.27x | 1.86x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.55x | 3.10x | 1.17x | 0.60x | 4.42x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 10.44x | 25.41x | 4.13x | 11.69x |
Profitability & Efficiency
NTES leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
NTES delivers a 20.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $20 in annual profit, vs $-3 for IQ. NTES carries lower financial leverage with a 0.04x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to IQ's 1.06x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), NTES scores 8/9 vs SOHU's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +14.1% | +20.4% | +3.1% | -2.9% | +1.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +8.8% | +15.2% | +2.0% | -0.9% | +0.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -10.7% | +23.3% | +4.8% | +5.8% | -8.4% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -7.4% | +22.1% | +6.3% | +7.8% | -8.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 8 | 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.04x | 0.04x | 0.28x | 1.06x | 0.36x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$122M | -$45.1B | $54.5B | $10.7B | -$5.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $160M | $51.5B | $24.8B | $3.5B | $10.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $38M | $6.4B | $79.3B | $14.2B | $5.1B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | — | 9.71x | 0.77x | 3.10x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
NTES leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in NTES five years ago would be worth $11,631 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $881 for IQ. Over the past 12 months, BIDU leads with a +61.3% total return vs IQ's -36.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NTES at 11.2% vs IQ's -41.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -0.2% | -19.8% | -6.9% | -40.4% | -16.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +50.0% | +12.8% | +61.3% | -36.0% | +25.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +14.6% | +37.4% | +14.2% | -79.6% | +10.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -11.9% | +16.3% | -27.0% | -91.2% | -78.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -61.9% | +375.8% | -17.5% | -92.2% | +95.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +4.6% | +11.2% | +4.5% | -41.1% | +3.2% |
Risk & Volatility
SOHU leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
SOHU is the less volatile stock with a 0.71 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than BILI's 1.77 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. SOHU currently trades 91.3% from its 52-week high vs IQ's 42.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.71x | 0.74x | 1.41x | 1.43x | 1.77x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $17.30 | $159.55 | $165.30 | $2.84 | $36.40 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $9.50 | $103.23 | $81.17 | $1.07 | $17.45 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +91.3% | +73.4% | +84.6% | +42.6% | +60.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 53.5 | 58.5 | 69.1 | 45.6 | 43.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 47K | 750K | 2.0M | 11.1M | 2.4M |
Analyst Outlook
NTES leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: SOHU as "Hold", NTES as "Buy", BIDU as "Buy", IQ as "Buy", BILI as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 78.5% upside for IQ (target: $2) vs 10.6% for BIDU (target: $155). NTES is the only dividend payer here at 2.62% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $20.00 | $149.75 | $154.70 | $2.16 | $34.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 18 | 32 | 53 | 22 | 24 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +2.6% | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 4 | 3 | 1 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $20.90 | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +8.6% | +0.1% | +1.9% | 0.0% | +0.2% |
NTES leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). IQ leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics).
SOHU vs NTES vs BIDU vs IQ vs BILI: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SOHU or NTES or BIDU or IQ or BILI a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Bilibili Inc.
(BILI) is the stronger pick with 19. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -8. 3% for iQIYI, Inc. (IQ). iQIYI, Inc. (IQ) offers the better valuation at 10. 7x trailing P/E (4. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate NetEase, Inc. (NTES) a "Buy" — based on 32 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 — SOHU or NTES or BIDU or IQ or BILI?
On trailing P/E, iQIYI, Inc.
(IQ) is the cheapest at 10. 7x versus NetEase, Inc. at 15. 6x. On forward P/E, NetEase, Inc. is actually cheaper at 1. 9x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Baidu, Inc. wins at 0. 04x versus NetEase, Inc. 's 0. 08x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — SOHU or NTES or BIDU or IQ or BILI?
Over the past 5 years, NetEase, Inc.
(NTES) delivered a total return of +16. 3%, compared to -91. 2% for iQIYI, Inc. (IQ). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NTES returned +375. 8% versus IQ's -92. 2%. 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 — SOHU or NTES or BIDU or IQ or BILI?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Sohu.
com Limited (SOHU) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 71β versus Bilibili Inc. 's 1. 77β — meaning BILI is approximately 149% more volatile than SOHU relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, NetEase, Inc. (NTES) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 4% versus 106% for iQIYI, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — SOHU or NTES or BIDU or IQ or BILI?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Bilibili Inc.
(BILI) is pulling ahead at 19. 1% versus -8. 3% for iQIYI, Inc. (IQ). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Bilibili Inc. grew EPS 72. 3% year-over-year, compared to -251. 7% for Sohu. com Limited. Over a 3-year CAGR, BILI leads at 11. 4% 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 — SOHU or NTES or BIDU or IQ or BILI?
NetEase, Inc.
(NTES) is the more profitable company, earning 30. 0% net margin versus -16. 8% for Sohu. com Limited — meaning it keeps 30. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NTES leads at 31. 8% versus -18. 3% for SOHU. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — SOHU leads at 72. 3%, 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 SOHU or NTES or BIDU or IQ or BILI 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, Baidu, Inc. (BIDU) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 04x versus NetEase, Inc. 's 0. 08x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, NetEase, Inc. (NTES) trades at 1. 9x forward P/E versus 4. 8x for iQIYI, Inc. — 3. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for IQ: 78. 5% to $2. 16.
08Which pays a better dividend — SOHU or NTES or BIDU or IQ or BILI?
In this comparison, NTES (2.
6% yield) pays a dividend. SOHU, BIDU, IQ, BILI do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is SOHU or NTES or BIDU or IQ or BILI better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, NetEase, Inc.
(NTES) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 74), 2. 6% yield, +375. 8% 10Y return). Bilibili Inc. (BILI) carries a higher beta of 1. 77 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (NTES: +375. 8%, BILI: +95. 6%), 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 SOHU and NTES and BIDU and IQ and BILI?
These companies operate in different sectors (SOHU (Technology) and NTES (Technology) and BIDU (Communication Services) and IQ (Communication Services) and BILI (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: SOHU is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NTES is a mid-cap deep-value stock; BIDU is a mid-cap deep-value stock; IQ is a small-cap deep-value stock; BILI is a small-cap high-growth stock. NTES pays a dividend while SOHU, BIDU, IQ, BILI 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.