Seek Returns logo

AFRM vs. CDW: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison

Updated on

Here’s a clear look at AFRM and CDW, comparing key factors like historical performance, profitability, financial strength, growth, dividend, and valuation.

Company Profile

SymbolAFRMCDW
Company NameAffirm Holdings, Inc.CDW Corporation
CountryUnited StatesUnited States
GICS SectorFinancialsInformation Technology
GICS IndustryFinancial ServicesElectronic Equipment, Instruments & Components
Market Capitalization23.54 billion USD21.88 billion USD
ExchangeNasdaqGSNasdaqGS
Listing DateJanuary 13, 2021June 27, 2013
Security TypeCommon StockCommon Stock

Historical Performance

This chart compares the performance of AFRM and CDW by tracking the growth of an initial $10,000 investment in each. Use the tabs to select the desired time period. Data is adjusted for dividends and splits.

AFRM vs. CDW: Growth of a $10,000 investment over the past one year.

Historical Performance at a Glance

SymbolAFRMCDW
5-Day Price Return-4.95%0.49%
13-Week Price Return40.50%-11.24%
26-Week Price Return-2.38%-11.02%
52-Week Price Return159.61%-23.85%
Month-to-Date Return7.73%-4.28%
Year-to-Date Return21.28%-4.10%
10-Day Avg. Volume5.47M1.23M
3-Month Avg. Volume6.45M1.18M
3-Month Volatility52.09%25.24%
Beta3.681.03

Profitability

Return on Equity (TTM)

AFRM

-2.22%

Financial Services Industry

Max
40.58%
Q3
20.06%
Median
10.67%
Q1
4.19%
Min
-10.31%

AFRM has a negative Return on Equity of -2.22%. This indicates the company is generating a loss for its shareholders, which can be a result of unprofitability or negative shareholder equity and is often a sign of financial distress.

CDW

45.37%

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
29.99%
Q3
15.78%
Median
9.05%
Q1
5.63%
Min
-9.55%

CDW’s Return on Equity of 45.37% is exceptionally high, placing it well beyond the typical range for the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry. This demonstrates a superior ability to generate profit from shareholder investments, though it could also be inflated by high financial leverage.

AFRM vs. CDW: A comparison of their Return on Equity (TTM) against their respective Financial Services and Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry benchmarks.

Net Profit Margin (TTM)

AFRM

-2.33%

Financial Services Industry

Max
52.86%
Q3
25.58%
Median
12.23%
Q1
6.64%
Min
-9.92%

AFRM has a negative Net Profit Margin of -2.33%, indicating the company is operating at a net loss as its expenses exceeded its revenues.

CDW

4.92%

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
25.55%
Q3
12.80%
Median
7.58%
Q1
3.09%
Min
-8.70%

CDW’s Net Profit Margin of 4.92% is aligned with the median group of its peers in the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry. This indicates its ability to convert revenue into profit is typical for the sector.

AFRM vs. CDW: A comparison of their Net Profit Margin (TTM) against their respective Financial Services and Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry benchmarks.

Operating Profit Margin (TTM)

AFRM

-5.22%

Financial Services Industry

Max
77.28%
Q3
37.68%
Median
18.17%
Q1
9.27%
Min
-8.19%

AFRM has a negative Operating Profit Margin of -5.22%. This signifies the company is unprofitable at the operational level, as its core business expenses exceed its revenue.

CDW

7.64%

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
30.04%
Q3
16.04%
Median
9.75%
Q1
4.27%
Min
-12.63%

CDW’s Operating Profit Margin of 7.64% is around the midpoint for the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry, indicating that its efficiency in managing core business operations is typical for the sector.

AFRM vs. CDW: A comparison of their Operating Profit Margin (TTM) against their respective Financial Services and Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry benchmarks.

Profitability at a Glance

SymbolAFRMCDW
Return on Equity (TTM)-2.22%45.37%
Return on Assets (TTM)-0.61%7.26%
Net Profit Margin (TTM)-2.33%4.92%
Operating Profit Margin (TTM)-5.22%7.64%
Gross Profit Margin (TTM)--21.57%

Financial Strength

Current Ratio (MRQ)

AFRM

4.49

Financial Services Industry

Max
4.58
Q3
2.59
Median
1.33
Q1
0.69
Min
0.01

For the Financial Services industry, the Current Ratio is often not the most suitable measure of short-term liquidity.

CDW

1.35

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
4.43
Q3
2.88
Median
2.05
Q1
1.52
Min
0.64

CDW’s Current Ratio of 1.35 falls into the lower quartile for the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry. This indicates a tighter liquidity situation and a more constrained capacity to handle short-term debt than many of its competitors.

AFRM vs. CDW: A comparison of their Current Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Financial Services and Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry benchmarks.

Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)

AFRM

2.49

Financial Services Industry

Max
4.96
Q3
2.10
Median
0.57
Q1
0.12
Min
0.00

The Debt-to-Equity Ratio is often not the primary focus for assessing leverage in the Financial Services industry.

CDW

2.28

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
1.14
Q3
0.54
Median
0.34
Q1
0.11
Min
0.00

With a Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 2.28, CDW operates with exceptionally high leverage compared to the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry norm. This suggests an aggressive reliance on debt financing, which can magnify returns but also significantly elevates financial risk.

AFRM vs. CDW: A comparison of their Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Financial Services and Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry benchmarks.

Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)

AFRM

-3.76

Financial Services Industry

Max
136.23
Q3
56.08
Median
6.55
Q1
2.01
Min
-33.27

The Interest Coverage Ratio is often not a primary indicator of debt servicing capacity in the Financial Services industry.

CDW

7.69

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
101.00
Q3
43.88
Median
13.27
Q1
3.73
Min
-18.73

CDW’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 7.69 is positioned comfortably within the norm for the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry, indicating a standard and healthy capacity to cover its interest payments.

AFRM vs. CDW: A comparison of their Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) against their respective Financial Services and Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry benchmarks.

Financial Strength at a Glance

SymbolAFRMCDW
Current Ratio (MRQ)4.491.35
Quick Ratio (MRQ)4.411.17
Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)2.492.28
Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)-3.767.69

Growth

Revenue Growth

AFRM vs. CDW: A side-by-side comparison of their Revenue Growth for the MRQ (YoY), TTM (YoY), 3-Year CAGR, and 5-Year CAGR periods.

EPS Growth

AFRM vs. CDW: A side-by-side comparison of their EPS Growth for the MRQ (YoY), TTM (YoY), 3-Year CAGR, and 5-Year CAGR periods.

Dividend

Dividend Yield (TTM)

AFRM

0.00%

Financial Services Industry

Max
8.18%
Q3
3.60%
Median
1.56%
Q1
0.00%
Min
0.00%

AFRM currently does not pay a dividend, resulting in a yield of 0%. This is a common strategy for growth-focused companies that prioritize reinvesting earnings, though it may be less typical in mature, income-oriented sectors.

CDW

1.51%

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
4.86%
Q3
2.53%
Median
1.28%
Q1
0.16%
Min
0.00%

CDW’s Dividend Yield of 1.51% is consistent with its peers in the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry, providing a dividend return that is standard for its sector.

AFRM vs. CDW: A comparison of their Dividend Yield (TTM) against their respective Financial Services and Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry benchmarks.

Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)

AFRM

0.00%

Financial Services Industry

Max
155.56%
Q3
63.71%
Median
18.08%
Q1
0.00%
Min
0.00%

AFRM has a Dividend Payout Ratio of 0%, indicating it does not currently pay a dividend. This is a common strategy for growth-oriented companies that reinvest all profits back into the business.

CDW

30.73%

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
161.37%
Q3
67.12%
Median
34.46%
Q1
3.82%
Min
0.00%

CDW’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 30.73% is within the typical range for the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry, suggesting a balanced approach between shareholder payouts and company reinvestment.

AFRM vs. CDW: A comparison of their Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM) against their respective Financial Services and Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry benchmarks.

Dividend at a Glance

SymbolAFRMCDW
Dividend Yield (TTM)0.00%1.51%
Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)0.00%30.73%

Valuation

Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)

AFRM

--

Financial Services Industry

Max
63.23
Q3
32.10
Median
14.41
Q1
10.81
Min
0.37

P/E Ratio data for AFRM is currently unavailable.

CDW

20.40

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
73.87
Q3
41.11
Median
25.31
Q1
18.58
Min
8.59

CDW’s P/E Ratio of 20.40 is within the middle range for the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry. This suggests its valuation is in line with the sector average, representing neither a significant premium nor a discount compared to its peers.

AFRM vs. CDW: A comparison of their Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM) against their respective Financial Services and Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)

AFRM

8.81

Financial Services Industry

Max
11.16
Q3
5.45
Median
2.61
Q1
1.25
Min
0.04

The P/S Ratio is often not a primary valuation tool in the Financial Services industry.

CDW

1.00

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
6.74
Q3
3.49
Median
2.03
Q1
1.16
Min
0.11

In the lower quartile for the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry, CDW’s P/S Ratio of 1.00 indicates its revenue is valued more conservatively than most of its peers. This could present a compelling opportunity if the market has overlooked its sales-generating capabilities.

AFRM vs. CDW: A comparison of their Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM) against their respective Financial Services and Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)

AFRM

5.03

Financial Services Industry

Max
7.09
Q3
3.79
Median
1.46
Q1
0.83
Min
0.04

AFRM’s P/B Ratio of 5.03 is in the upper tier for the Financial Services industry. This indicates that investors are paying a premium relative to the company’s net assets, a valuation that hinges on its ability to generate superior profits.

CDW

9.53

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
6.45
Q3
3.49
Median
1.98
Q1
1.31
Min
0.35

At 9.53, CDW’s P/B Ratio is at an extreme premium to the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry. This signifies that the market’s valuation is heavily reliant on future potential rather than its current net asset value, which can be a high-risk proposition.

AFRM vs. CDW: A comparison of their Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Financial Services and Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry benchmarks.

Valuation at a Glance

SymbolAFRMCDW
Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)--20.40
Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)8.811.00
Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)5.039.53
Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (TTM)38.6821.56