Telecommunications Services
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
UZF vs NFLX vs CSCO vs DIS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Entertainment
Communication Equipment
Entertainment
UZF vs NFLX vs CSCO vs DIS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Telecommunications Services | Entertainment | Communication Equipment | Entertainment |
| Market Cap | $1.55B | $374.00B | $364.95B | $192.60B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.91B | $45.18B | $59.05B | $97.26B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $290M | $10.98B | $11.08B | $11.22B |
| Gross Margin | 57.5% | 48.5% | 64.4% | 37.2% |
| Operating Margin | 4.2% | 29.5% | 23.0% | 15.5% |
| Forward P/E | 20.2x | 24.8x | 22.2x | 16.5x |
| Total Debt | $1.71B | $14.46B | $29.64B | $44.88B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $113M | $9.03B | $9.47B | $5.70B |
UZF vs NFLX vs CSCO vs DIS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Array Digital Infra… (UZF) | 100 | 70.5 | -29.5% |
| Netflix, Inc. (NFLX) | 100 | 175.5 | +75.5% |
| Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) | 100 | 174.2 | +74.2% |
| The Walt Disney Com… (DIS) | 100 | 60.9 | -39.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: UZF vs NFLX vs CSCO vs DIS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
UZF is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and defensive is your priority.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.60, yield 100.0%
- Beta 0.60, yield 100.0%, current ratio 0.72x
- 100.0% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs CSCO's 1.7%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
NFLX carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 15.9%, EPS growth 27.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 12.6%
- 8.8% 10Y total return vs CSCO's 301.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.39, Low D/E 54.3%, current ratio 1.19x
- PEG 0.75 vs UZF's 4.10
CSCO is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +57.5% vs NFLX's -23.6%
DIS lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 15.9% revenue growth vs UZF's -95.7% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 24.3% margin vs DIS's 11.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.39 vs CSCO's 0.92, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 100.0% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs CSCO's 1.7%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +57.5% vs NFLX's -23.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 19.8% ROA vs UZF's 3.8%, ROIC 29.8% vs -0.6% |
UZF vs NFLX vs CSCO vs DIS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
UZF vs NFLX vs CSCO vs DIS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
NFLX leads in 2 of 6 categories
UZF leads 0 • CSCO leads 0 • DIS leads 0 • 4 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NFLX leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
DIS is the larger business by revenue, generating $97.3B annually — 50.8x UZF's $1.9B. NFLX is the more profitable business, keeping 24.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to DIS's 11.5%. On growth, NFLX holds the edge at +17.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.9B | $45.2B | $59.1B | $97.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $430M | $30.1B | $16.1B | $20.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $290M | $11.0B | $11.1B | $11.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $2.6B | $9.5B | $12.8B | $7.1B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +57.5% | +48.5% | +64.4% | +37.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +4.2% | +29.5% | +23.0% | +15.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +15.2% | +24.3% | +18.8% | +11.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +137.8% | +20.9% | +21.8% | +7.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -93.8% | +17.6% | +9.7% | +6.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +6.8% | +31.1% | +29.5% | -29.8% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — UZF and DIS each lead in 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 5.4x trailing earnings, UZF trades at a 85% valuation discount to CSCO's 36.1x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), NFLX offers better value at 1.06x vs UZF's 1.10x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.6B | $374.0B | $365.0B | $192.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $3.1B | $379.4B | $385.1B | $231.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 5.38x | 34.89x | 36.14x | 15.87x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 20.17x | 24.80x | 22.18x | 16.53x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 1.10x | 1.06x | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 12.61x | 26.34x | 12.10x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 9.51x | 8.28x | 6.44x | 2.04x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.61x | 14.32x | 7.87x | 1.72x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 0.59x | 39.53x | 27.46x | 19.11x |
Profitability & Efficiency
NFLX leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
NFLX delivers a 41.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $41 in annual profit, vs $8 for UZF. DIS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.39x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to UZF's 0.66x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CSCO scores 8/9 vs UZF's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +8.1% | +41.3% | +23.2% | +9.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +3.8% | +19.8% | +9.0% | +5.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -0.6% | +29.8% | +13.0% | +6.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -0.7% | +30.5% | +13.7% | +8.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 7 | 8 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.66x | 0.54x | 0.63x | 0.39x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.6B | $5.4B | $20.2B | $39.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $113M | $9.0B | $9.5B | $5.7B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.7B | $14.5B | $29.6B | $44.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -1.74x | 17.33x | 9.64x | 9.95x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — NFLX and CSCO each lead in 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 $6,017 for DIS. Over the past 12 months, CSCO leads with a +57.5% total return vs NFLX's -23.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NFLX at 38.6% vs DIS's 2.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +2.0% | -3.0% | +22.3% | -2.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -12.0% | -23.6% | +57.5% | +7.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +63.4% | +166.5% | +109.3% | +8.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -4.1% | +75.2% | +87.2% | -39.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -4.1% | +875.3% | +301.7% | +11.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +17.8% | +38.6% | +27.9% | +2.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — NFLX and CSCO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
NFLX is the less volatile stock with a 0.39 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CSCO's 0.92 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CSCO currently trades 97.3% from its 52-week high vs NFLX's 65.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.60x | 0.39x | 0.92x | 0.90x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $22.59 | $134.12 | $94.72 | $124.69 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $7.21 | $75.01 | $59.07 | $92.19 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +79.3% | +65.8% | +97.3% | +87.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 62.2 | 35.3 | 63.9 | 64.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 6K | 44.0M | 18.9M | 9.1M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — UZF and CSCO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NFLX as "Buy", CSCO as "Buy", DIS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 31.8% upside for NFLX (target: $116) vs 4.7% for CSCO (target: $97). For income investors, UZF offers the higher dividend yield at 100.00% vs DIS's 0.92%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $116.29 | $96.50 | $139.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 99 | 73 | 63 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +100.0% | — | +1.7% | +0.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | — | 15 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $22.76 | — | $1.61 | $1.00 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.4% | +2.4% | +2.0% | +1.8% |
NFLX leads in 2 of 6 categories — strongest in Income & Cash Flow and Profitability & Efficiency. 4 categories are tied.
UZF vs NFLX vs CSCO vs DIS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is UZF or NFLX or CSCO or DIS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Netflix, Inc.
(NFLX) is the stronger pick with 15. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -95. 7% for Array Digital Infrastructure, Inc. 5. 500% Senior Notes due 2070 (UZF). Array Digital Infrastructure, Inc. 5. 500% Senior Notes due 2070 (UZF) offers the better valuation at 5. 4x trailing P/E (20. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Netflix, Inc. (NFLX) a "Buy" — based on 99 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 — UZF or NFLX or CSCO or DIS?
On trailing P/E, Array Digital Infrastructure, Inc.
5. 500% Senior Notes due 2070 (UZF) is the cheapest at 5. 4x versus Cisco Systems, Inc. at 36. 1x. On forward P/E, The Walt Disney Company is actually cheaper at 16. 5x — 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: Netflix, Inc. wins at 0. 75x versus Array Digital Infrastructure, Inc. 5. 500% Senior Notes due 2070's 4. 10x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — UZF or NFLX or CSCO or DIS?
Over the past 5 years, Cisco Systems, Inc.
(CSCO) delivered a total return of +87. 2%, compared to -39. 8% for The Walt Disney Company (DIS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NFLX returned +875. 3% versus UZF's -4. 1%. 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 — UZF or NFLX or CSCO or DIS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Netflix, Inc.
(NFLX) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 39β versus Cisco Systems, Inc. 's 0. 92β — meaning CSCO is approximately 137% more volatile than NFLX relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, The Walt Disney Company (DIS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 39% versus 66% for Array Digital Infrastructure, Inc. 5. 500% Senior Notes due 2070 — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — UZF or NFLX or CSCO or DIS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Netflix, Inc.
(NFLX) is pulling ahead at 15. 9% versus -95. 7% for Array Digital Infrastructure, Inc. 5. 500% Senior Notes due 2070 (UZF). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Array Digital Infrastructure, Inc. 5. 500% Senior Notes due 2070 grew EPS 823. 9% year-over-year, compared to 0. 4% for Cisco Systems, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, NFLX leads at 12. 6% 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 — UZF or NFLX or CSCO or DIS?
Array Digital Infrastructure, Inc.
5. 500% Senior Notes due 2070 (UZF) is the more profitable company, earning 178. 5% net margin versus 13. 1% for The Walt Disney Company — meaning it keeps 178. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NFLX leads at 29. 5% versus -30. 2% for UZF. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CSCO leads at 64. 9%, 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 UZF or NFLX or CSCO or DIS 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, Netflix, Inc. (NFLX) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 75x versus Array Digital Infrastructure, Inc. 5. 500% Senior Notes due 2070's 4. 10x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, The Walt Disney Company (DIS) trades at 16. 5x forward P/E versus 24. 8x for Netflix, Inc. — 8. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for NFLX: 31. 8% to $116. 29.
08Which pays a better dividend — UZF or NFLX or CSCO or DIS?
In this comparison, UZF (100.
0% yield), CSCO (1. 7% yield), DIS (0. 9% yield) pay a dividend. NFLX does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is UZF or NFLX or CSCO or DIS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Netflix, Inc.
(NFLX) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 39), +875. 3% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (NFLX: +875. 3%, DIS: +11. 8%), 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 UZF and NFLX and CSCO and DIS?
These companies operate in different sectors (UZF (Communication Services) and NFLX (Communication Services) and CSCO (Technology) and DIS (Communication Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: UZF is a small-cap deep-value stock; NFLX is a large-cap high-growth stock; CSCO is a large-cap quality compounder stock; DIS is a mid-cap deep-value stock. UZF, CSCO, DIS pay a dividend while NFLX does 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
- Net Margin > 9%
- Dividend Yield > 40.0%
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.