Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (AMD)vs MU Holdings, Inc. (MU)

Published by TickerVerdict
Updated July 29, 2026 at 08:28 AM UTCData: Financial Modeling PrepMethodology

Factual comparison for information only — not investment advice. Capital is at risk.

Quick verdict

AMD2
vs
MU4
six-factor score · higher is stronger

Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (AMD) and MU Holdings, Inc. (MU) appeal to different investors. On our six-factor framework, AMD scores 2 and MU scores 4. MU looks cheaper on the multiples that matter, while AMD grows faster and MU earns higher returns on capital. Overall, MU edges this comparison, but the right pick depends on whether you prioritise value, growth, income or balance-sheet safety.

2-year relative performance

AMD +26%MU -6%Indexed to 100 · ~2-year relative performance

At-a-glance comparison

MetricAMDMU
Price$454.62$506.14
Market cap$741.3B$47.3B
Forward P/E10.7×30.0×
EV / EBITDA91.5×32.4×
Price / sales19.8×4.1×
FCF yield6.5%5.5%
Rev. growth (3y)34.3%20.5%
EPS growth (3y)164.4%13.3%
Operating margin11.7%44.1%
ROIC6.2%22.2%
Net debt / EBITDA1.19×-0.74×
Dividend yield3.5%0.2%
1-year return8.3%50.4%
Beta2.471.76
Valuation MU
Growth AMD
Quality MU
Balance sheet MU
Income AMD
Momentum MU

Business model and revenue mix

Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. operates in Semiconductors (Technology), while MU Holdings, Inc. sits in Software—Infrastructure (Technology). Because both compete in the same sector, this is a direct head-to-head and the financial differences below are especially meaningful. AMD carries a beta of 2.47 versus 1.76 for MU, meaning AMD has historically been the more volatile of the two.

Valuation

On valuation, MU is the cheaper stock. AMD trades on a forward P/E of 10.72 and EV/EBITDA of 91.47, against 29.96 and 32.42 for MU. Price-to-sales is 19.79 vs 4.11, and free-cash-flow yield is 6.5% vs 5.5%. A higher multiple is only justified if the company can sustain faster growth or wider margins, which is exactly what the next sections test.

Fwd P/E
10.7×
30.0×
EV/EBITDA
91.5×
32.4×
P/S
19.8×
4.1×
FCF yield
6.5%
5.5%
AMDMU

Growth profile

AMD is the faster grower. AMD has compounded revenue at 34.3% over three years with EPS growth of 164.4%, while MU has delivered 20.5% revenue and 13.3% EPS growth. Growth like this is the single biggest driver of long-term returns, but it also tends to come with a richer valuation, so it must be weighed against the multiples above.

Revenue 3y
34.3%
20.5%
EPS 3y
164.4%
13.3%
AMDMU

Profitability and quality

On profitability and quality, MU is stronger. AMD posts a 11.7% operating margin, 8.1% return on equity and 6.2% return on invested capital. MU posts 44.1%, 24.8% and 22.2% respectively. Return on invested capital above roughly 15% is a hallmark of a durable competitive advantage, so this metric deserves particular attention.

Op. margin
11.7%
44.1%
ROE
8.1%
24.8%
ROIC
6.2%
22.2%
AMDMU

Balance-sheet risk

MU has the safer balance sheet. AMD carries net-debt/EBITDA of 1.19x with a current ratio of 2.72, versus -0.74x and 1.58 for MU. Lower leverage gives a company more room to invest through a downturn and reduces the risk of dilution or distress.

Price performance and shareholder returns

Over the past year AMD returned 8.3% against 50.4% for MU; on a three-year annualised basis it is -2.0% vs 27.0%. AMD yields 3.5% and MU yields 0.2%. Past performance never guarantees future results, but the multi-year track record shows how the market has rewarded each business so far.

Which stock fits which investor

For value-oriented investors, MU is the better fit on today's multiples. Growth investors will likely prefer AMD, which is expanding faster. Income investors should lean toward AMD for its higher shareholder yield, while investors who prize quality-at-a-reasonable-price will favour MU for its superior returns on capital. This is a comparison of facts, not a recommendation — your time horizon, risk tolerance and existing holdings should drive the final decision.

  • Value: MU
  • Growth: AMD
  • Income: AMD
  • Quality: MU

Best brokers to buy MU

Partner offers · we may earn a commission · capital at risk
Best for global market access

Interactive Brokers

★★★★★ 4.8
Fees
From $0
Min deposit
$0
  • Real stocks & ETFs
  • 150+ global markets
  • SEC / FCA / IIROC / ASIC regulated
  • No account minimum
Open account →
Best for US investors

Fidelity

★★★★★ 4.8
Fees
$0 commission
Min deposit
$0
  • Real stocks & ETFs
  • Zero commission
  • SIPC protected
  • No account minimum
Open account →
Was this comparison helpful?

Reader reviews

No reviews yet — be the first to rate this comparison.

Frequently asked questions

Is AMD or MU the better buy right now?
Neither is universally "better." AMD scores 2 and MU scores 4 on our six-factor framework. MU is cheaper, AMD grows faster, and MU is higher quality — so the right pick depends on your objective.
Which stock is cheaper, AMD or MU?
MU is the cheaper stock across forward P/E (10.72 vs 29.96), EV/EBITDA (91.47 vs 32.42) and price-to-sales (19.79 vs 4.11).
Which has grown faster, AMD or MU?
AMD has the stronger growth profile, with three-year revenue CAGR of 34.3% for AMD versus 20.5% for MU.
Which stock pays a bigger dividend?
AMD yields 3.5% and MU yields 0.2%, so AMD is the stronger income choice.

Related comparisons

Methodology and data sources

Each comparison runs both companies through a transparent six-factor framework — valuation, growth, profitability/quality, balance-sheet strength, income and momentum. Factor winners are decided by fixed rules on the metrics shown above, not opinion. Figures are sourced from Financial Modeling Prep and refreshed on a schedule; the “last updated” date reflects the most recent data pull. TickerVerdict provides factual data comparisons for informational purposes only. Nothing here is investment advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security. Figures may be delayed; verify with your broker before investing. Capital is at risk.

AMD vs MUEdge: MU
Buy MU