AFRM vs. SNOW: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison
UpdatedHere’s a clear look at AFRM and SNOW, 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
SNOW stands out with 59.76 billion USD in market value—about 3.92× AFRM’s market cap of 15.24 billion USD.
AFRM’s beta of 3.66 points to much larger expected swings compared to SNOW’s calmer 1.11, suggesting both higher upside and downside potential.
| Symbol | AFRM | SNOW |
|---|---|---|
| Company Name | Affirm Holdings, Inc. | Snowflake Inc. |
| Country | US | US |
| Sector | Technology | Technology |
| Industry | Software - Infrastructure | Software - Application |
| CEO | Mr. Max Roth Levchin | Mr. Sridhar Ramaswamy Ph.D. |
| Price | 47.24 USD | 179.12 USD |
| Market Cap | 15.24 billion USD | 59.76 billion USD |
| Beta | 3.66 | 1.11 |
| Exchange | NASDAQ | NYSE |
| IPO Date | January 13, 2021 | September 16, 2020 |
| ADR | No | No |
Performance Comparison
This chart compares the performance of AFRM and SNOW 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 SNOW based on earnings, cash flow, sales, and book value. Pay attention to the following notable points where extreme values stand out.
- Neither AFRM nor SNOW turned a profit—both carry negative P/E ratios of -246.14 and -46.18, underscoring continued losses that pressure their valuations.
- Analysts assign negative forward PEG ratios to both AFRM (-1.38) and SNOW (-1.25), suggesting expectation of shrinking or negative earnings in the upcoming period—a worrying sign for their profit outlook.
| Symbol | AFRM | SNOW |
|---|---|---|
| Price-to-Earnings Ratio (P/E, TTM) | -246.14 | -46.18 |
| Forward PEG Ratio (TTM) | -1.38 | -1.25 |
| Price-to-Sales Ratio (P/S, TTM) | 5.07 | 16.48 |
| Price-to-Book Ratio (P/B, TTM) | 5.32 | 19.25 |
| Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (P/FCF, TTM) | 25.04 | 66.40 |
| EV-to-EBITDA (TTM) | 69.85 | -45.85 |
| EV-to-Sales (TTM) | 7.07 | 16.50 |
| EV-to-Free Cash Flow (TTM) | 34.90 | 66.46 |
Dividend Comparison
Neither AFRM nor SNOW 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 | SNOW |
|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield (TTM) | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Financial Strength Metrics Comparison
This section dives into the financial resilience of AFRM and SNOW, spotlighting key metrics like liquidity, leverage, and debt coverage. Check out the standout observations below where notable differences or extremes pop up.
- Both AFRM and SNOW report negative interest coverage ratios (-0.24, -1054.32), meaning EBIT itself is negative—neither can cover interest, a critical solvency warning.
| Symbol | AFRM | SNOW |
|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio (TTM) | 63.09 | 1.78 |
| Quick Ratio (TTM) | 63.09 | 1.78 |
| Debt-to-Equity Ratio (TTM) | 2.56 | 0.87 |
| Debt-to-Assets Ratio (TTM) | 0.71 | 0.30 |
| Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) | -0.24 | -1054.32 |