Seek Returns logo

CRWV vs. UBER: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison

Updated on

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

Company Profile

SymbolCRWVUBER
Company NameCoreWeave, Inc.Uber Technologies, Inc.
CountryUnited StatesUnited States
GICS SectorInformation TechnologyIndustrials
GICS IndustryIT ServicesGround Transportation
Market Capitalization69.30 billion USD207.04 billion USD
ExchangeNasdaqGSNYSE
Listing DateMarch 28, 2025May 10, 2019
Security TypeCommon StockCommon Stock

Historical Performance

This chart compares the performance of CRWV and UBER 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.

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

Historical Performance at a Glance

SymbolCRWVUBER
5-Day Price Return1.43%2.76%
13-Week Price Return-8.54%2.73%
26-Week Price Return160.19%42.13%
52-Week Price Return--33.10%
Month-to-Date Return2.29%1.34%
Year-to-Date Return249.95%64.59%
10-Day Avg. Volume32.82M14.34M
3-Month Avg. Volume24.71M18.52M
3-Month Volatility101.86%28.35%
Beta0.601.20

Profitability

Return on Equity (TTM)

CRWV

-61.34%

IT Services Industry

Max
32.78%
Q3
19.28%
Median
13.86%
Q1
5.50%
Min
-10.00%

CRWV has a negative Return on Equity of -61.34%. 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.

UBER

62.42%

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
23.35%
Q3
13.74%
Median
9.05%
Q1
6.86%
Min
1.73%

UBER’s Return on Equity of 62.42% is exceptionally high, placing it well beyond the typical range for the Ground Transportation industry. This demonstrates a superior ability to generate profit from shareholder investments, though it could also be inflated by high financial leverage.

CRWV vs. UBER: A comparison of their Return on Equity (TTM) against their respective IT Services and Ground Transportation industry benchmarks.

Net Profit Margin (TTM)

CRWV

-35.73%

IT Services Industry

Max
19.71%
Q3
11.01%
Median
6.66%
Q1
2.96%
Min
-6.22%

CRWV has a negative Net Profit Margin of -35.73%, indicating the company is operating at a net loss as its expenses exceeded its revenues.

UBER

26.68%

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
32.19%
Q3
17.08%
Median
7.19%
Q1
4.45%
Min
-5.54%

A Net Profit Margin of 26.68% places UBER in the upper quartile for the Ground Transportation industry, signifying strong profitability and more effective cost management than most of its peers.

CRWV vs. UBER: A comparison of their Net Profit Margin (TTM) against their respective IT Services and Ground Transportation industry benchmarks.

Operating Profit Margin (TTM)

CRWV

7.69%

IT Services Industry

Max
22.44%
Q3
14.90%
Median
8.82%
Q1
4.91%
Min
-9.89%

CRWV’s Operating Profit Margin of 7.69% is around the midpoint for the IT Services industry, indicating that its efficiency in managing core business operations is typical for the sector.

UBER

9.03%

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
42.90%
Q3
23.80%
Median
10.93%
Q1
7.06%
Min
-12.94%

UBER’s Operating Profit Margin of 9.03% is around the midpoint for the Ground Transportation industry, indicating that its efficiency in managing core business operations is typical for the sector.

CRWV vs. UBER: A comparison of their Operating Profit Margin (TTM) against their respective IT Services and Ground Transportation industry benchmarks.

Profitability at a Glance

SymbolCRWVUBER
Return on Equity (TTM)-61.34%62.42%
Return on Assets (TTM)-7.34%24.38%
Net Profit Margin (TTM)-35.73%26.68%
Operating Profit Margin (TTM)7.69%9.03%
Gross Profit Margin (TTM)74.00%33.93%

Financial Strength

Current Ratio (MRQ)

CRWV

0.52

IT Services Industry

Max
3.17
Q3
2.00
Median
1.47
Q1
1.05
Min
0.52

CRWV’s Current Ratio of 0.52 falls into the lower quartile for the IT Services industry. This indicates a tighter liquidity situation and a more constrained capacity to handle short-term debt than many of its competitors.

UBER

1.11

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
2.00
Q3
1.31
Median
0.98
Q1
0.74
Min
0.35

UBER’s Current Ratio of 1.11 aligns with the median group of the Ground Transportation industry, indicating that its short-term liquidity is in line with its sector peers.

CRWV vs. UBER: A comparison of their Current Ratio (MRQ) against their respective IT Services and Ground Transportation industry benchmarks.

Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)

CRWV

2.91

IT Services Industry

Max
3.11
Q3
1.55
Median
0.55
Q1
0.17
Min
0.00

CRWV’s leverage is in the upper quartile of the IT Services industry, with a Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 2.91. While this approach can boost equity growth, it also exposes the company to greater financial vulnerability.

UBER

0.42

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
2.51
Q3
1.48
Median
1.02
Q1
0.48
Min
0.00

Falling into the lower quartile for the Ground Transportation industry, UBER’s Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 0.42 points to a conservative financing strategy. This results in lower financial risk but potentially limits strategic investments compared to more leveraged competitors.

CRWV vs. UBER: A comparison of their Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ) against their respective IT Services and Ground Transportation industry benchmarks.

Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)

CRWV

0.33

IT Services Industry

Max
129.00
Q3
56.00
Median
11.69
Q1
0.77
Min
-28.15

CRWV’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 0.33 is a critical concern. A value below 1.0 means operating earnings are insufficient to cover interest expenses, indicating severe financial strain and high default risk.

UBER

-0.24

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
59.80
Q3
25.78
Median
8.23
Q1
2.52
Min
-24.57

UBER has a negative Interest Coverage Ratio of -0.24. This indicates that its earnings were insufficient to cover even its operational costs, let alone its interest payments, signaling significant financial distress.

CRWV vs. UBER: A comparison of their Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) against their respective IT Services and Ground Transportation industry benchmarks.

Financial Strength at a Glance

SymbolCRWVUBER
Current Ratio (MRQ)0.521.11
Quick Ratio (MRQ)0.510.97
Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)2.910.42
Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)0.33-0.24

Growth

Revenue Growth

CRWV vs. UBER: 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

CRWV vs. UBER: 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)

CRWV

0.00%

IT Services Industry

Max
2.79%
Q3
1.76%
Median
0.58%
Q1
0.00%
Min
0.00%

CRWV 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.

UBER

0.00%

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
5.29%
Q3
2.57%
Median
1.59%
Q1
0.71%
Min
0.00%

UBER 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.

CRWV vs. UBER: A comparison of their Dividend Yield (TTM) against their respective IT Services and Ground Transportation industry benchmarks.

Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)

CRWV

0.00%

IT Services Industry

Max
107.85%
Q3
52.62%
Median
22.53%
Q1
0.00%
Min
0.00%

CRWV 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.

UBER

0.00%

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
149.12%
Q3
75.08%
Median
41.35%
Q1
16.42%
Min
0.00%

UBER 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.

CRWV vs. UBER: A comparison of their Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM) against their respective IT Services and Ground Transportation industry benchmarks.

Dividend at a Glance

SymbolCRWVUBER
Dividend Yield (TTM)0.00%0.00%
Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)0.00%0.00%

Valuation

Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)

CRWV

--

IT Services Industry

Max
56.41
Q3
33.17
Median
23.17
Q1
16.18
Min
6.62

P/E Ratio data for CRWV is currently unavailable.

UBER

16.43

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
39.04
Q3
24.45
Median
17.51
Q1
12.92
Min
5.87

UBER’s P/E Ratio of 16.43 is within the middle range for the Ground Transportation industry. This suggests its valuation is in line with the sector average, representing neither a significant premium nor a discount compared to its peers.

CRWV vs. UBER: A comparison of their Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM) against their respective IT Services and Ground Transportation industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)

CRWV

16.97

IT Services Industry

Max
5.99
Q3
4.26
Median
1.93
Q1
0.97
Min
0.12

With a P/S Ratio of 16.97, CRWV trades at a valuation that eclipses even the highest in the IT Services industry. This implies the market has priced in exceptionally optimistic scenarios for future revenue growth, posing considerable valuation risk.

UBER

4.38

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
2.82
Q3
2.22
Median
1.41
Q1
0.88
Min
0.24

With a P/S Ratio of 4.38, UBER trades at a valuation that eclipses even the highest in the Ground Transportation industry. This implies the market has priced in exceptionally optimistic scenarios for future revenue growth, posing considerable valuation risk.

CRWV vs. UBER: A comparison of their Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM) against their respective IT Services and Ground Transportation industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)

CRWV

20.48

IT Services Industry

Max
12.34
Q3
7.54
Median
3.84
Q1
2.52
Min
0.88

At 20.48, CRWV’s P/B Ratio is at an extreme premium to the IT Services 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.

UBER

8.63

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
5.27
Q3
3.03
Median
1.40
Q1
1.18
Min
0.67

At 8.63, UBER’s P/B Ratio is at an extreme premium to the Ground Transportation 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.

CRWV vs. UBER: A comparison of their Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ) against their respective IT Services and Ground Transportation industry benchmarks.

Valuation at a Glance

SymbolCRWVUBER
Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)--16.43
Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)16.974.38
Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)20.488.63
Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (TTM)--24.29