Auto - Manufacturers
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
ZK vs AMZN vs QCOM vs MSFT vs AAPL
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Specialty Retail
Semiconductors
Software - Infrastructure
Consumer Electronics
ZK vs AMZN vs QCOM vs MSFT vs AAPL — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Auto - Manufacturers | Specialty Retail | Semiconductors | Software - Infrastructure | Consumer Electronics |
| Market Cap | $6.85B | $2.93T | $230.92B | $3.08T | $4.31T |
| Revenue (TTM) | $90.59B | $742.78B | $44.49B | $318.27B | $451.44B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-3.33B | $90.80B | $9.92B | $125.22B | $122.58B |
| Gross Margin | 18.9% | 50.6% | 54.8% | 68.3% | 47.9% |
| Operating Margin | -4.0% | 11.5% | 25.5% | 46.8% | 32.6% |
| Forward P/E | 2.3x | 31.4x | 20.4x | 24.8x | 33.7x |
| Total Debt | $15.60B | $152.99B | $16.37B | $112.18B | $112.38B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $7.78B | $86.81B | $7.84B | $30.24B | $35.93B |
ZK vs AMZN vs QCOM vs MSFT vs AAPL — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 24 | Dec 25 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| ZEEKR Intelligent T… (ZK) | 100 | 106.1 | +6.1% |
| Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) | 100 | 132.2 | +32.2% |
| QUALCOMM Incorporat… (QCOM) | 100 | 82.4 | -17.6% |
| Microsoft Corporati… (MSFT) | 100 | 118.5 | +18.5% |
| Apple Inc. (AAPL) | 100 | 145.0 | +45.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ZK vs AMZN vs QCOM vs MSFT vs AAPL
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ZK carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 46.9%, EPS growth 34.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 126.6%
- 46.9% revenue growth vs AAPL's 6.4%
- Lower P/E (2.3x vs 33.7x)
- Beta 0.35 vs QCOM's 1.64
AMZN is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 1.12 vs QCOM's 9.80
QCOM is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability is your priority.
- Dividend streak 23 yrs, beta 1.64, yield 1.6%
- 1.6% yield, 23-year raise streak, vs MSFT's 0.8%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
- +53.4% vs MSFT's -4.5%
MSFT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.85, Low D/E 32.7%, current ratio 1.35x
- Beta 0.85, yield 0.8%, current ratio 1.35x
- 39.3% margin vs ZK's -3.7%
AAPL is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 12.0% 10Y total return vs MSFT's 7.8%
- 34.0% ROA vs ZK's -5.4%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 46.9% revenue growth vs AAPL's 6.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (2.3x vs 33.7x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 39.3% margin vs ZK's -3.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.35 vs QCOM's 1.64 | |
| Dividends | 1.6% yield, 23-year raise streak, vs MSFT's 0.8%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +53.4% vs MSFT's -4.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 34.0% ROA vs ZK's -5.4% |
ZK vs AMZN vs QCOM vs MSFT vs AAPL — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
ZK vs AMZN vs QCOM vs MSFT vs AAPL — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MSFT leads in 1 of 6 categories
ZK leads 1 • AAPL leads 1 • QCOM leads 1 • AMZN leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MSFT leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AMZN is the larger business by revenue, generating $742.8B annually — 16.7x QCOM's $44.5B. MSFT is the more profitable business, keeping 39.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ZK's -3.7%. On growth, ZK holds the edge at +36.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $90.6B | $742.8B | $44.5B | $318.3B | $451.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$2.7B | $155.9B | $12.8B | $192.6B | $160.0B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$3.3B | $90.8B | $9.9B | $125.2B | $122.6B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $0 | -$2.5B | $12.5B | $72.9B | $129.2B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +18.9% | +50.6% | +54.8% | +68.3% | +47.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -4.0% | +11.5% | +25.5% | +46.8% | +32.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -3.7% | +12.2% | +22.3% | +39.3% | +27.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +2.0% | -0.3% | +28.1% | +22.9% | +28.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +36.4% | +16.6% | -3.5% | +18.3% | +16.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +83.8% | +74.8% | +173.0% | +23.4% | +21.8% |
Valuation Metrics
ZK leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 30.4x trailing earnings, MSFT trades at a 30% valuation discount to QCOM's 43.7x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), AMZN offers better value at 1.36x vs QCOM's 21.03x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $6.8B | $2.93T | $230.9B | $3.08T | $4.31T |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $14.7B | $3.00T | $239.5B | $3.17T | $4.38T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.98x | 38.03x | 43.73x | 30.43x | 39.31x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 2.29x | 31.41x | 20.37x | 24.77x | 33.71x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.36x | 21.03x | 1.62x | 2.20x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 20.58x | 17.16x | 19.46x | 30.27x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.09x | 4.09x | 5.21x | 10.94x | 10.35x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 7.18x | 11.42x | 9.02x | 59.68x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 4.61x | 381.09x | 18.01x | 43.06x | 43.59x |
Profitability & Efficiency
AAPL leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
AAPL delivers a 146.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $147 in annual profit, vs $23 for AMZN. MSFT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.33x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to AAPL's 1.52x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), AAPL scores 8/9 vs ZK's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | +23.3% | +40.2% | +33.1% | +146.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -5.4% | +11.5% | +18.4% | +19.2% | +34.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | +14.7% | +29.1% | +24.9% | +67.4% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | — | +15.3% | +28.9% | +29.7% | +69.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.37x | 0.77x | 0.33x | 1.52x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $7.8B | $66.2B | $8.5B | $81.9B | $76.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $7.8B | $86.8B | $7.8B | $30.2B | $35.9B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $15.6B | $153.0B | $16.4B | $112.2B | $112.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -14.40x | 39.96x | 17.60x | 55.65x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — AMZN and QCOM and AAPL each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in AAPL five years ago would be worth $23,479 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $9,459 for ZK. Over the past 12 months, QCOM leads with a +53.4% total return vs MSFT's -4.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors AMZN at 37.1% vs ZK's -1.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | — | +20.4% | +27.2% | -12.0% | +8.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +2.6% | +42.0% | +53.4% | -4.5% | +49.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -5.4% | +157.7% | +111.7% | +37.6% | +70.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -5.4% | +70.9% | +82.3% | +73.8% | +134.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -5.4% | +702.2% | +382.4% | +776.0% | +1199.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -1.8% | +37.1% | +28.4% | +11.2% | +19.5% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ZK and AAPL each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ZK is the less volatile stock with a 0.35 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than QCOM's 1.64 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. AAPL currently trades 99.5% from its 52-week high vs MSFT's 74.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.35x | 1.50x | 1.64x | 0.85x | 1.04x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $31.71 | $278.56 | $228.04 | $555.45 | $294.76 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $25.28 | $188.82 | $121.99 | $356.28 | $193.46 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +84.3% | +97.9% | +96.1% | +74.7% | +99.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 40.0 | 74.2 | 82.6 | 57.9 | 69.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 0 | 45.2M | 15.6M | 32.5M | 40.0M |
Analyst Outlook
QCOM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ZK as "Buy", AMZN as "Buy", QCOM as "Hold", MSFT as "Buy", AAPL as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 34.2% upside for MSFT (target: $557) vs -15.3% for QCOM (target: $186). For income investors, QCOM offers the higher dividend yield at 1.57% vs AAPL's 0.35%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $33.25 | $306.77 | $185.56 | $556.88 | $319.44 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 94 | 69 | 81 | 110 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +1.6% | +0.8% | +0.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | — | 23 | 19 | 14 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $3.44 | $3.23 | $1.03 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +2.7% | 0.0% | +3.8% | +0.6% | +2.1% |
MSFT leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). ZK leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
ZK vs AMZN vs QCOM vs MSFT vs AAPL: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ZK or AMZN or QCOM or MSFT or AAPL a better buy right now?
For growth investors, ZEEKR Intelligent Technology Holding Limited (ZK) is the stronger pick with 46.
9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 6. 4% for Apple Inc. (AAPL). Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) offers the better valuation at 30. 4x trailing P/E (24. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate ZEEKR Intelligent Technology Holding Limited (ZK) a "Buy" — based on 2 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 — ZK or AMZN or QCOM or MSFT or AAPL?
On trailing P/E, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the cheapest at 30.
4x versus QUALCOMM Incorporated at 43. 7x. On forward P/E, ZEEKR Intelligent Technology Holding Limited is actually cheaper at 2. 3x — 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: Amazon. com, Inc. wins at 1. 12x versus QUALCOMM Incorporated's 9. 80x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ZK or AMZN or QCOM or MSFT or AAPL?
Over the past 5 years, Apple Inc.
(AAPL) delivered a total return of +134. 8%, compared to -5. 4% for ZEEKR Intelligent Technology Holding Limited (ZK). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AAPL returned +1199% versus ZK's -5. 4%. 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 — ZK or AMZN or QCOM or MSFT or AAPL?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), ZEEKR Intelligent Technology Holding Limited (ZK) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
35β versus QUALCOMM Incorporated's 1. 64β — meaning QCOM is approximately 365% more volatile than ZK relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 33% versus 152% for Apple Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ZK or AMZN or QCOM or MSFT or AAPL?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), ZEEKR Intelligent Technology Holding Limited (ZK) is pulling ahead at 46.
9% versus 6. 4% for Apple Inc. (AAPL). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: ZEEKR Intelligent Technology Holding Limited grew EPS 34. 6% year-over-year, compared to -44. 2% for QUALCOMM Incorporated. Over a 3-year CAGR, ZK leads at 126. 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 — ZK or AMZN or QCOM or MSFT or AAPL?
Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the more profitable company, earning 36.
1% net margin versus -8. 5% for ZEEKR Intelligent Technology Holding Limited — meaning it keeps 36. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MSFT leads at 45. 6% versus -8. 5% for ZK. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MSFT leads at 68. 8%, 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 ZK or AMZN or QCOM or MSFT or AAPL 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, Amazon. com, Inc. (AMZN) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 12x versus QUALCOMM Incorporated's 9. 80x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, ZEEKR Intelligent Technology Holding Limited (ZK) trades at 2. 3x forward P/E versus 33. 7x for Apple Inc. — 31. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MSFT: 34. 2% to $556. 88.
08Which pays a better dividend — ZK or AMZN or QCOM or MSFT or AAPL?
In this comparison, QCOM (1.
6% yield), MSFT (0. 8% yield), AAPL (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. ZK, AMZN do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is ZK or AMZN or QCOM or MSFT or AAPL better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
85), 0. 8% yield, +776. 0% 10Y return). Amazon. com, Inc. (AMZN) carries a higher beta of 1. 50 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (MSFT: +776. 0%, AMZN: +702. 2%), 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 ZK and AMZN and QCOM and MSFT and AAPL?
These companies operate in different sectors (ZK (Consumer Cyclical) and AMZN (Consumer Cyclical) and QCOM (Technology) and MSFT (Technology) and AAPL (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: ZK is a small-cap high-growth stock; AMZN is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; QCOM is a large-cap quality compounder stock; MSFT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; AAPL is a mega-cap quality compounder stock. QCOM, MSFT pay a dividend while ZK, AMZN, AAPL 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.