Communication Equipment
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
CRNT vs GILT vs KO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Communication Equipment
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
CRNT vs GILT vs KO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Communication Equipment | Communication Equipment | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $243M | $842M | $341.71B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $335M | $470M | $49.28B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-2M | $32M | $13.70B |
| Gross Margin | 34.4% | 30.3% | 61.7% |
| Operating Margin | 3.0% | 5.2% | 29.3% |
| Forward P/E | 20.1x | 22.2x | 24.3x |
| Total Debt | $50M | $11M | $45.49B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $38M | $169M | $10.27B |
CRNT vs GILT vs KO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ceragon Networks Lt… (CRNT) | 100 | 125.6 | +25.6% |
| Gilat Satellite Net… (GILT) | 100 | 207.1 | +107.1% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 177.7 | +77.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CRNT vs GILT vs KO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CRNT is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- beta 2.04
- Lower volatility, beta 2.04, Low D/E 28.7%, current ratio 1.87x
- Beta 2.04, current ratio 1.87x
GILT is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 47.9%, EPS growth -22.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 23.5%
- 214.6% 10Y total return vs KO's 115.0%
- 47.9% revenue growth vs CRNT's -14.1%
KO has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in quality and dividends.
- 27.8% margin vs CRNT's -0.7%
- 2.6% yield; 56-year raise streak; the other 2 pay no meaningful dividend
- 13.1% ROA vs CRNT's -0.8%, ROIC 15.8% vs 4.7%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 47.9% revenue growth vs CRNT's -14.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (20.1x vs 24.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs CRNT's -0.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 2.04 vs GILT's 2.25 | |
| Dividends | 2.6% yield; 56-year raise streak; the other 2 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +111.4% vs KO's +17.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.1% ROA vs CRNT's -0.8%, ROIC 15.8% vs 4.7% |
CRNT vs GILT vs KO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
CRNT vs GILT vs KO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 3 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO is the larger business by revenue, generating $49.3B annually — 147.1x CRNT's $335M. KO is the more profitable business, keeping 27.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CRNT's -0.7%. On growth, GILT holds the edge at +20.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $335M | $470M | $49.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $24M | $49M | $15.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$2M | $32M | $13.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $23M | $3M | $12.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +34.4% | +30.3% | +61.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +3.0% | +5.2% | +29.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -0.7% | +6.8% | +27.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +6.8% | +0.7% | +25.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -4.1% | +20.0% | +12.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -48.0% | +161.6% | +18.2% |
Valuation Metrics
CRNT leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 26.1x trailing earnings, KO trades at a 33% valuation discount to GILT's 38.8x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, CRNT's 10.0x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than KO's 25.4x.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $243M | $842M | $341.7B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $254M | $684M | $376.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -115.88x | 38.79x | 26.12x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 20.15x | 22.23x | 24.27x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 2.34x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 10.01x | 15.58x | 25.45x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.72x | 1.86x | 7.13x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.40x | 1.59x | 9.99x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 13.52x | 91.62x | 64.52x |
Profitability & Efficiency
KO leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
KO delivers a 41.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $41 in annual profit, vs $-1 for CRNT. GILT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.02x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to KO's 1.33x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), KO scores 7/9 vs GILT's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -1.4% | +7.3% | +41.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -0.8% | +4.7% | +13.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +4.7% | +5.7% | +15.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +5.7% | +4.7% | +17.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 3 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.29x | 0.02x | 1.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $11M | -$158M | $35.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $38M | $169M | $10.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $50M | $11M | $45.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.65x | 8.81x | 10.70x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
GILT leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in KO five years ago would be worth $16,528 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $7,143 for CRNT. Over the past 12 months, GILT leads with a +111.4% total return vs KO's +17.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors GILT at 30.4% vs CRNT's 9.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +23.3% | -1.6% | +16.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +17.9% | +111.4% | +17.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +31.1% | +121.7% | +39.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -28.6% | +33.8% | +65.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +60.7% | +214.6% | +115.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +9.4% | +30.4% | +11.7% |
Risk & Volatility
KO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
KO is the less volatile stock with a -0.23 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than GILT's 2.25 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. KO currently trades 94.5% from its 52-week high vs GILT's 63.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.04x | 2.25x | -0.23x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $3.29 | $20.93 | $84.04 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.82 | $6.24 | $65.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +82.1% | +63.0% | +94.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 46.5 | 38.7 | 49.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 636K | 875K | 13.6M |
Analyst Outlook
KO leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CRNT as "Buy", GILT as "Buy", KO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 57.4% upside for CRNT (target: $4) vs 8.5% for KO (target: $86). KO is the only dividend payer here at 2.56% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $4.25 | $20.00 | $86.13 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 6 | 2 | 48 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +2.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 56 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $2.04 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.2% |
KO leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). CRNT leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics).
CRNT vs GILT vs KO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CRNT or GILT or KO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Gilat Satellite Networks Ltd.
(GILT) is the stronger pick with 47. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -14. 1% for Ceragon Networks Ltd. (CRNT). The Coca-Cola Company (KO) offers the better valuation at 26. 1x trailing P/E (24. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Ceragon Networks Ltd. (CRNT) a "Buy" — based on 6 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 — CRNT or GILT or KO?
On trailing P/E, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the cheapest at 26.
1x versus Gilat Satellite Networks Ltd. at 38. 8x. On forward P/E, Ceragon Networks Ltd. is actually cheaper at 20. 1x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CRNT or GILT or KO?
Over the past 5 years, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) delivered a total return of +65.
3%, compared to -28. 6% for Ceragon Networks Ltd. (CRNT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GILT returned +214. 6% versus CRNT's +60. 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 — CRNT or GILT or KO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
23β versus Gilat Satellite Networks Ltd. 's 2. 25β — meaning GILT is approximately -1062% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Gilat Satellite Networks Ltd. (GILT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 133% for The Coca-Cola Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CRNT or GILT or KO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Gilat Satellite Networks Ltd.
(GILT) is pulling ahead at 47. 9% versus -14. 1% for Ceragon Networks Ltd. (CRNT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Coca-Cola Company grew EPS 23. 6% year-over-year, compared to -108. 6% for Ceragon Networks Ltd.. Over a 3-year CAGR, GILT leads at 23. 5% 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 — CRNT or GILT or KO?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus -0. 6% for Ceragon Networks Ltd. — meaning it keeps 27. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: KO leads at 28. 7% versus 3. 3% for CRNT. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — KO leads at 61. 6%, 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 CRNT or GILT or KO more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Ceragon Networks Ltd.
(CRNT) trades at 20. 1x forward P/E versus 24. 3x for The Coca-Cola Company — 4. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CRNT: 57. 4% to $4. 25.
08Which pays a better dividend — CRNT or GILT or KO?
In this comparison, KO (2.
6% yield) pays a dividend. CRNT, GILT do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CRNT or GILT or KO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
23), 2. 6% yield, +115. 0% 10Y return). Ceragon Networks Ltd. (CRNT) carries a higher beta of 2. 04 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (KO: +115. 0%, CRNT: +60. 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 CRNT and GILT and KO?
These companies operate in different sectors (CRNT (Technology) and GILT (Technology) and KO (Consumer Defensive)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: CRNT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; GILT is a small-cap high-growth stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock. KO pays a dividend while CRNT, GILT 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.