AFRM vs. FOUR: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison
UpdatedHere’s a clear look at AFRM and FOUR, comparing key factors like performance, valuation metrics, dividends, and financial strength. It’s built for investors or anyone curious to see how these two stocks match up.
Company Overview
AFRM dominates in value with a market cap of 15.24 billion USD, eclipsing FOUR’s 5.89 billion USD by roughly 2.59×.
AFRM’s beta of 3.66 points to much larger expected swings compared to FOUR’s calmer 1.80, suggesting both higher upside and downside potential.
| Symbol | AFRM | FOUR |
|---|---|---|
| Company Name | Affirm Holdings, Inc. | Shift4 Payments, Inc. |
| Country | US | US |
| Sector | Technology | Technology |
| Industry | Software - Infrastructure | Software - Infrastructure |
| CEO | Mr. Max Roth Levchin | Mr. Jared Isaacman |
| Price | 47.24 USD | 87.34 USD |
| Market Cap | 15.24 billion USD | 5.89 billion USD |
| Beta | 3.66 | 1.80 |
| Exchange | NASDAQ | NYSE |
| IPO Date | January 13, 2021 | June 5, 2020 |
| ADR | No | No |
Performance Comparison
This chart compares the performance of AFRM and FOUR over the past year by tracking the growth of an initial $10,000 investment in each (starting one year ago).
Hover over the lines to see the investment’s value and total return (%) at specific dates.
Data is adjusted for dividends and splits.
Valuation Metrics Comparison
The section examines key financial ratios to assess the valuation of AFRM and FOUR based on earnings, cash flow, sales, and book value. Pay attention to the following notable points where extreme values stand out.
- AFRM posts a negative P/E of -246.14, reflecting last year’s net loss, while FOUR at 27.08 signals healthy earnings.
- AFRM posts a negative forward PEG of -1.38, hinting at anticipated earnings decline, whereas FOUR at 1.65 has projections for stable or growing earnings.
| Symbol | AFRM | FOUR |
|---|---|---|
| Price-to-Earnings Ratio (P/E, TTM) | -246.14 | 27.08 |
| Forward PEG Ratio (TTM) | -1.38 | 1.65 |
| Price-to-Sales Ratio (P/S, TTM) | 5.07 | 1.70 |
| Price-to-Book Ratio (P/B, TTM) | 5.32 | 7.34 |
| Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (P/FCF, TTM) | 25.04 | 12.47 |
| EV-to-EBITDA (TTM) | 69.85 | -20.81 |
| EV-to-Sales (TTM) | 7.07 | 2.19 |
| EV-to-Free Cash Flow (TTM) | 34.90 | 16.10 |
Dividend Comparison
Neither AFRM nor FOUR currently pays a dividend yield; this often indicates they are reinvesting earnings for growth, prioritizing long-term expansion over immediate cash returns to shareholders.
| Symbol | AFRM | FOUR |
|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield (TTM) | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Financial Strength Metrics Comparison
This section dives into the financial resilience of AFRM and FOUR, spotlighting key metrics like liquidity, leverage, and debt coverage. Check out the standout observations below where notable differences or extremes pop up.
- FOUR is highly leveraged (debt-to-equity ratio 3.58), elevating both potential gains and risks, compared to AFRM at 2.56, which maintains a steadier capital structure.
- With negative EBIT (-0.24), AFRM cannot cover its interest payments. FOUR, with an interest coverage of 3.05, meets its interest obligations.
| Symbol | AFRM | FOUR |
|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio (TTM) | 63.09 | 1.36 |
| Quick Ratio (TTM) | 63.09 | 1.36 |
| Debt-to-Equity Ratio (TTM) | 2.56 | 3.58 |
| Debt-to-Assets Ratio (TTM) | 0.71 | 0.58 |
| Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) | -0.24 | 3.05 |