AMAT vs. SNOW: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison
UpdatedHere’s a clear look at AMAT 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
AMAT dominates in value with a market cap of 131.76 billion USD, eclipsing SNOW’s 59.76 billion USD by roughly 2.20×.
AMAT’s beta of 1.71 points to much larger expected swings compared to SNOW’s calmer 1.11, suggesting both higher upside and downside potential.
| Symbol | AMAT | SNOW |
|---|---|---|
| Company Name | Applied Materials, Inc. | Snowflake Inc. |
| Country | US | US |
| Sector | Technology | Technology |
| Industry | Semiconductors | Software - Application |
| CEO | Mr. Gary E. Dickerson | Mr. Sridhar Ramaswamy Ph.D. |
| Price | 162.18 USD | 179.12 USD |
| Market Cap | 131.76 billion USD | 59.76 billion USD |
| Beta | 1.71 | 1.11 |
| Exchange | NASDAQ | NYSE |
| IPO Date | March 17, 1980 | September 16, 2020 |
| ADR | No | No |
Performance Comparison
This chart compares the performance of AMAT 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 AMAT and SNOW based on earnings, cash flow, sales, and book value. Pay attention to the following notable points where extreme values stand out.
- SNOW shows a negative P/E of -46.18, highlighting a year of losses, whereas AMAT at 19.46 trades on solid profitability.
- SNOW shows a negative forward PEG of -1.25, signaling expected earnings contraction, while AMAT at 2.87 maintains analysts’ projections for stable or improved profits.
| Symbol | AMAT | SNOW |
|---|---|---|
| Price-to-Earnings Ratio (P/E, TTM) | 19.46 | -46.18 |
| Forward PEG Ratio (TTM) | 2.87 | -1.25 |
| Price-to-Sales Ratio (P/S, TTM) | 4.69 | 16.48 |
| Price-to-Book Ratio (P/B, TTM) | 6.94 | 19.25 |
| Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (P/FCF, TTM) | 22.20 | 66.40 |
| EV-to-EBITDA (TTM) | 15.04 | -45.85 |
| EV-to-Sales (TTM) | 4.69 | 16.50 |
| EV-to-Free Cash Flow (TTM) | 22.22 | 66.46 |
Dividend Comparison
AMAT delivers a 0.99% dividend yield, blending income with growth, whereas SNOW appears to retain its profits, possibly to fund operations, R&D, or other growth initiatives.
| Symbol | AMAT | SNOW |
|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield (TTM) | 0.99% | 0.00% |
Financial Strength Metrics Comparison
This section dives into the financial resilience of AMAT and SNOW, spotlighting key metrics like liquidity, leverage, and debt coverage. Check out the standout observations below where notable differences or extremes pop up.
- AMAT meets its interest obligations (ratio 31.92). In stark contrast, SNOW’s negative ratio (-1054.32) means its operating earnings (EBIT) don't cover basic operations, let alone interest, signaling serious financial trouble.
| Symbol | AMAT | SNOW |
|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio (TTM) | 2.46 | 1.78 |
| Quick Ratio (TTM) | 1.76 | 1.78 |
| Debt-to-Equity Ratio (TTM) | 0.33 | 0.87 |
| Debt-to-Assets Ratio (TTM) | 0.19 | 0.30 |
| Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) | 31.92 | -1054.32 |