Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN)vs F Holdings, Inc. (F)

Quick verdict

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

2-year relative performance

At-a-glance comparison

Business model and revenue mix

Amazon.com, Inc. operates in Internet Retail (Consumer Cyclical), while F Holdings, Inc. sits in Semiconductors (Technology). The two operate in different sectors, so cyclicality and end-market exposure differ — factor that into any portfolio overlap. AMZN carries a beta of 1.53 versus 1.54 for F, meaning F has historically been the more volatile of the two.

Valuation

On valuation, F is the cheaper stock. AMZN trades on a forward P/E of 45.95 and EV/EBITDA of 32.34, against 30.96 and 7.97 for F. Price-to-sales is 20.74 vs 4.13, and free-cash-flow yield is 2.0% vs 6.4%. A higher multiple is only justified if the company can sustain faster growth or wider margins, which is exactly what the next sections test.

Growth profile

F is the faster grower. AMZN has compounded revenue at 16.9% over three years with EPS growth of 25.7%, while F has delivered 22.7% revenue and 26.5% 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.

Profitability and quality

On profitability and quality, AMZN is stronger. AMZN posts a 45.9% operating margin, 26.3% return on equity and 17.3% return on invested capital. F posts 29.3%, 14.7% and 30.3% respectively. Return on invested capital above roughly 15% is a hallmark of a durable competitive advantage, so this metric deserves particular attention.

Balance-sheet risk

AMZN has the safer balance sheet. AMZN carries net-debt/EBITDA of 0.86x with a current ratio of 1.04, versus 3.57x and 3.39 for F. 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 AMZN returned 4.0% against 52.3% for F; on a three-year annualised basis it is 42.8% vs 22.3%. AMZN yields 0.0% and F yields 0.0%. 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, F is the better fit on today's multiples. Growth investors will likely prefer F, which is expanding faster. Income investors should lean toward F for its higher shareholder yield, while investors who prize quality-at-a-reasonable-price will favour AMZN 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: F
• Growth: F
• Income: F
• Quality: AMZN

Frequently asked questions

Is AMZN or F the better buy right now?

Neither is universally "better." AMZN scores 2 and F scores 4 on our six-factor framework. F is cheaper, F grows faster, and AMZN is higher quality — so the right pick depends on your objective.

Which stock is cheaper, AMZN or F?

F is the cheaper stock across forward P/E (45.95 vs 30.96), EV/EBITDA (32.34 vs 7.97) and price-to-sales (20.74 vs 4.13).

Which has grown faster, AMZN or F?

F has the stronger growth profile, with three-year revenue CAGR of 16.9% for AMZN versus 22.7% for F.

Which stock pays a bigger dividend?

AMZN yields 0.0% and F yields 0.0%, so F is the stronger income choice.

Related comparisons

• AAPL vs AMZN
• AMD vs AMZN
• AMZN vs BABA
• AMZN vs LCID
• AMZN vs MSFT
• AMZN vs RIVN