Seek Returns logo

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

Updated on

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

Company Profile

SymbolFLEXUBER
Company NameFlex Ltd.Uber Technologies, Inc.
CountryUnited StatesUnited States
GICS SectorInformation TechnologyIndustrials
GICS IndustryElectronic Equipment, Instruments & ComponentsGround Transportation
Market Capitalization22.38 billion USD207.04 billion USD
ExchangeNasdaqGSNYSE
Listing DateMarch 18, 1994May 10, 2019
Security TypeCommon StockCommon Stock

Historical Performance

This chart compares the performance of FLEX 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.

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

Historical Performance at a Glance

SymbolFLEXUBER
5-Day Price Return3.01%2.76%
13-Week Price Return15.79%2.73%
26-Week Price Return104.09%42.13%
52-Week Price Return77.83%33.10%
Month-to-Date Return3.23%1.34%
Year-to-Date Return55.87%64.59%
10-Day Avg. Volume3.44M14.34M
3-Month Avg. Volume4.11M18.52M
3-Month Volatility31.60%28.35%
Beta1.261.20

Profitability

Return on Equity (TTM)

FLEX

16.77%

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
21.57%
Q3
13.27%
Median
8.55%
Q1
4.42%
Min
-4.21%

In the upper quartile for the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry, FLEX’s Return on Equity of 16.77% signals a highly effective use of shareholder capital to drive profitability compared to most of its peers.

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.

FLEX vs. UBER: A comparison of their Return on Equity (TTM) against their respective Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components and Ground Transportation industry benchmarks.

Net Profit Margin (TTM)

FLEX

3.42%

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
17.31%
Q3
10.85%
Median
7.26%
Q1
3.13%
Min
-3.00%

FLEX’s Net Profit Margin of 3.42% is aligned with the median group of its peers in the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry. This indicates its ability to convert revenue into profit is typical for the sector.

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.

FLEX vs. UBER: A comparison of their Net Profit Margin (TTM) against their respective Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components and Ground Transportation industry benchmarks.

Operating Profit Margin (TTM)

FLEX

4.78%

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
30.04%
Q3
15.08%
Median
9.55%
Q1
4.27%
Min
-3.83%

FLEX’s Operating Profit Margin of 4.78% is around the midpoint for the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components 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.

FLEX vs. UBER: A comparison of their Operating Profit Margin (TTM) against their respective Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components and Ground Transportation industry benchmarks.

Profitability at a Glance

SymbolFLEXUBER
Return on Equity (TTM)16.77%62.42%
Return on Assets (TTM)4.59%24.38%
Net Profit Margin (TTM)3.42%26.68%
Operating Profit Margin (TTM)4.78%9.03%
Gross Profit Margin (TTM)8.94%33.93%

Financial Strength

Current Ratio (MRQ)

FLEX

1.30

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
4.57
Q3
2.85
Median
2.03
Q1
1.51
Min
0.62

FLEX’s Current Ratio of 1.30 falls into the lower quartile for the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components 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.

FLEX vs. UBER: A comparison of their Current Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components and Ground Transportation industry benchmarks.

Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)

FLEX

0.74

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
1.14
Q3
0.54
Median
0.30
Q1
0.11
Min
0.00

FLEX’s leverage is in the upper quartile of the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry, with a Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 0.74. 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.

FLEX vs. UBER: A comparison of their Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components and Ground Transportation industry benchmarks.

Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)

FLEX

7.39

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
79.05
Q3
36.62
Median
12.51
Q1
3.72
Min
-18.73

FLEX’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 7.39 is positioned comfortably within the norm for the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry, indicating a standard and healthy capacity to cover its interest payments.

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.

FLEX vs. UBER: A comparison of their Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) against their respective Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components and Ground Transportation industry benchmarks.

Financial Strength at a Glance

SymbolFLEXUBER
Current Ratio (MRQ)1.301.11
Quick Ratio (MRQ)0.790.97
Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)0.740.42
Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)7.39-0.24

Growth

Revenue Growth

FLEX 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

FLEX 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)

FLEX

0.00%

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
5.36%
Q3
2.53%
Median
1.28%
Q1
0.16%
Min
0.00%

FLEX 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.

FLEX vs. UBER: A comparison of their Dividend Yield (TTM) against their respective Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components and Ground Transportation industry benchmarks.

Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)

FLEX

0.00%

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
218.94%
Q3
90.25%
Median
38.81%
Q1
3.69%
Min
0.00%

FLEX 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.

FLEX vs. UBER: A comparison of their Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM) against their respective Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components and Ground Transportation industry benchmarks.

Dividend at a Glance

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

Valuation

Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)

FLEX

24.91

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
74.74
Q3
42.40
Median
26.55
Q1
20.05
Min
10.12

FLEX’s P/E Ratio of 24.91 is within the middle range for the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry. This suggests its valuation is in line with the sector average, representing neither a significant premium nor a discount compared to its peers.

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.

FLEX vs. UBER: A comparison of their Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM) against their respective Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components and Ground Transportation industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)

FLEX

0.85

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
6.79
Q3
3.58
Median
2.05
Q1
1.29
Min
0.20

In the lower quartile for the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry, FLEX’s P/S Ratio of 0.85 indicates its revenue is valued more conservatively than most of its peers. This could present a compelling opportunity if the market has overlooked its sales-generating capabilities.

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.

FLEX vs. UBER: A comparison of their Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM) against their respective Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components and Ground Transportation industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)

FLEX

2.53

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
6.92
Q3
3.80
Median
2.23
Q1
1.42
Min
0.44

FLEX’s P/B Ratio of 2.53 is within the conventional range for the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry. This shows a balanced market view, where the stock’s price is neither at a significant premium nor a discount to the book value of its peers.

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.

FLEX vs. UBER: A comparison of their Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components and Ground Transportation industry benchmarks.

Valuation at a Glance

SymbolFLEXUBER
Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)24.9116.43
Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)0.854.38
Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)2.538.63
Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (TTM)20.1024.29