AMAT vs. TTWO: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison
UpdatedHere’s a clear look at AMAT and TTWO, 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 TTWO’s 40.02 billion USD by roughly 3.29×.
AMAT’s beta of 1.71 points to much larger expected swings compared to TTWO’s calmer 1.09, suggesting both higher upside and downside potential.
| Symbol | AMAT | TTWO |
|---|---|---|
| Company Name | Applied Materials, Inc. | Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. |
| Country | US | US |
| Sector | Technology | Technology |
| Industry | Semiconductors | Electronic Gaming & Multimedia |
| CEO | Mr. Gary E. Dickerson | Mr. Strauss H. Zelnick Esq., J.D. |
| Price | 162.18 USD | 226.76 USD |
| Market Cap | 131.76 billion USD | 40.02 billion USD |
| Beta | 1.71 | 1.09 |
| Exchange | NASDAQ | NASDAQ |
| IPO Date | March 17, 1980 | April 15, 1997 |
| ADR | No | No |
Performance Comparison
This chart compares the performance of AMAT and TTWO 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 TTWO based on earnings, cash flow, sales, and book value. Pay attention to the following notable points where extreme values stand out.
- TTWO shows a negative P/E of -8.95, highlighting a year of losses, whereas AMAT at 19.46 trades on solid profitability.
- TTWO shows a negative forward PEG of -0.30, signaling expected earnings contraction, while AMAT at 2.87 maintains analysts’ projections for stable or improved profits.
- TTWO reports a negative Price-to-Free Cash Flow ratio of -80.92, showing a cash flow shortfall that could threaten its operational sustainability, while AMAT at 22.20 maintains positive cash flow.
| Symbol | AMAT | TTWO |
|---|---|---|
| Price-to-Earnings Ratio (P/E, TTM) | 19.46 | -8.95 |
| Forward PEG Ratio (TTM) | 2.87 | -0.30 |
| Price-to-Sales Ratio (P/S, TTM) | 4.69 | 7.10 |
| Price-to-Book Ratio (P/B, TTM) | 6.94 | 18.75 |
| Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (P/FCF, TTM) | 22.20 | -80.92 |
| EV-to-EBITDA (TTM) | 15.04 | -11.55 |
| EV-to-Sales (TTM) | 4.69 | 7.13 |
| EV-to-Free Cash Flow (TTM) | 22.22 | -81.17 |
Dividend Comparison
AMAT delivers a 1.27% dividend yield, blending income with growth, whereas TTWO appears to retain its profits, possibly to fund operations, R&D, or other growth initiatives.
| Symbol | AMAT | TTWO |
|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield (TTM) | 1.27% | 0.00% |
Financial Strength Metrics Comparison
This section dives into the financial resilience of AMAT and TTWO, spotlighting key metrics like liquidity, leverage, and debt coverage. Check out the standout observations below where notable differences or extremes pop up.
- TTWO’s current ratio of 0.78 indicates its assets may not cover near-term debts, whereas AMAT at 2.46 maintains healthy liquidity.
- TTWO posts a quick ratio of 0.78, indicating limited coverage of short-term debts from its most liquid assets—while AMAT at 1.76 enjoys stronger liquidity resilience.
- AMAT meets its interest obligations (ratio 31.92). In stark contrast, TTWO’s negative ratio (-86.19) means its operating earnings (EBIT) don't cover basic operations, let alone interest, signaling serious financial trouble.
| Symbol | AMAT | TTWO |
|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio (TTM) | 2.46 | 0.78 |
| Quick Ratio (TTM) | 1.76 | 0.78 |
| Debt-to-Equity Ratio (TTM) | 0.33 | 0.75 |
| Debt-to-Assets Ratio (TTM) | 0.19 | 0.17 |
| Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) | 31.92 | -86.19 |