Seek Returns logo

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

Updated on

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

Company Profile

SymbolJBLUBER
Company NameJabil Inc.Uber Technologies, Inc.
CountryUnited StatesUnited States
GICS SectorInformation TechnologyIndustrials
GICS IndustryElectronic Equipment, Instruments & ComponentsGround Transportation
Market Capitalization22.31 billion USD198.80 billion USD
ExchangeNYSENYSE
Listing DateMay 3, 1993May 10, 2019
Security TypeCommon StockCommon Stock

Historical Performance

This chart compares the performance of JBL 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.

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

Historical Performance at a Glance

SymbolJBLUBER
5-Day Price Return1.39%1.17%
13-Week Price Return22.89%7.11%
26-Week Price Return27.85%20.84%
52-Week Price Return91.26%31.29%
Month-to-Date Return-6.84%8.64%
Year-to-Date Return44.48%58.04%
10-Day Avg. Volume1.45M15.07M
3-Month Avg. Volume1.36M20.41M
3-Month Volatility32.85%29.53%
Beta1.261.49

Profitability

Return on Equity (TTM)

JBL

38.64%

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
29.99%
Q3
15.78%
Median
9.05%
Q1
5.63%
Min
-9.55%

JBL’s Return on Equity of 38.64% is exceptionally high, placing it well beyond the typical range for the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry. This demonstrates a superior ability to generate profit from shareholder investments, though it could also be inflated by high financial leverage.

UBER

62.42%

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
22.11%
Q3
13.84%
Median
9.66%
Q1
7.55%
Min
0.36%

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.

JBL 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)

JBL

2.02%

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
25.55%
Q3
12.80%
Median
7.58%
Q1
3.09%
Min
-8.70%

Falling into the lower quartile for the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry, JBL’s Net Profit Margin of 2.02% indicates weaker profitability. This means the company retains a smaller portion of each dollar in sales as profit compared to its competitors.

UBER

26.68%

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
32.20%
Q3
18.59%
Median
7.11%
Q1
4.13%
Min
-10.38%

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.

JBL 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)

JBL

4.08%

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
30.04%
Q3
16.04%
Median
9.75%
Q1
4.27%
Min
-12.63%

JBL’s Operating Profit Margin of 4.08% is in the lower quartile for the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry. This indicates weaker profitability from core operations, which may stem from inefficiencies or competitive pressures on pricing.

UBER

9.03%

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
41.31%
Q3
23.16%
Median
11.33%
Q1
6.82%
Min
-12.08%

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.

JBL 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

SymbolJBLUBER
Return on Equity (TTM)38.64%62.42%
Return on Assets (TTM)3.25%24.38%
Net Profit Margin (TTM)2.02%26.68%
Operating Profit Margin (TTM)4.08%9.03%
Gross Profit Margin (TTM)8.86%33.93%

Financial Strength

Current Ratio (MRQ)

JBL

0.98

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
4.43
Q3
2.88
Median
2.05
Q1
1.52
Min
0.64

JBL’s Current Ratio of 0.98 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
2.03
Q3
1.26
Median
0.89
Q1
0.73
Min
0.38

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.

JBL 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)

JBL

2.24

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
1.14
Q3
0.54
Median
0.34
Q1
0.11
Min
0.00

With a Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 2.24, JBL operates with exceptionally high leverage compared to the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry norm. This suggests an aggressive reliance on debt financing, which can magnify returns but also significantly elevates financial risk.

UBER

0.42

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
2.51
Q3
1.51
Median
1.06
Q1
0.47
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.

JBL 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)

JBL

11.12

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
101.00
Q3
43.88
Median
13.27
Q1
3.73
Min
-18.73

JBL’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 11.12 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
51.07
Q3
22.54
Median
7.94
Q1
2.72
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.

JBL 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

SymbolJBLUBER
Current Ratio (MRQ)0.981.11
Quick Ratio (MRQ)0.470.97
Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)2.240.42
Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)11.12-0.24

Growth

Revenue Growth

JBL 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

JBL 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)

JBL

0.17%

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
4.86%
Q3
2.53%
Median
1.28%
Q1
0.16%
Min
0.00%

JBL’s Dividend Yield of 0.17% is consistent with its peers in the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry, providing a dividend return that is standard for its sector.

UBER

0.00%

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
5.44%
Q3
2.49%
Median
1.53%
Q1
0.39%
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.

JBL 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)

JBL

6.59%

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
161.37%
Q3
67.12%
Median
34.46%
Q1
3.82%
Min
0.00%

JBL’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 6.59% is within the typical range for the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry, suggesting a balanced approach between shareholder payouts and company reinvestment.

UBER

0.00%

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
137.07%
Q3
74.71%
Median
41.16%
Q1
15.12%
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.

JBL 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

SymbolJBLUBER
Dividend Yield (TTM)0.17%0.00%
Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)6.59%0.00%

Valuation

Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)

JBL

37.97

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
73.87
Q3
41.11
Median
25.31
Q1
18.58
Min
8.59

JBL’s P/E Ratio of 37.97 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

15.49

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
42.59
Q3
24.86
Median
16.38
Q1
12.79
Min
4.37

UBER’s P/E Ratio of 15.49 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.

JBL 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)

JBL

0.77

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
6.74
Q3
3.49
Median
2.03
Q1
1.16
Min
0.11

In the lower quartile for the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components industry, JBL’s P/S Ratio of 0.77 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

4.13

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
4.02
Q3
2.20
Median
1.23
Q1
0.87
Min
0.22

With a P/S Ratio of 4.13, 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.

JBL 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)

JBL

14.04

Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components Industry

Max
6.45
Q3
3.49
Median
1.98
Q1
1.31
Min
0.35

At 14.04, JBL’s P/B Ratio is at an extreme premium to the Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components 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
4.95
Q3
2.78
Median
1.38
Q1
1.17
Min
0.64

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.

JBL 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

SymbolJBLUBER
Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)37.9715.49
Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)0.774.13
Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)14.048.63
Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (TTM)18.8222.90