Tesla, Inc. (TSLA)vs Microsoft Corporation (MSFT)

Quick verdict

Tesla, Inc. (TSLA) and Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) appeal to different investors. On our six-factor framework, TSLA scores 4 and MSFT scores 2. TSLA looks cheaper on the multiples that matter, while MSFT grows faster and MSFT earns higher returns on capital. Overall, TSLA 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

Tesla, Inc. operates in Auto Manufacturers (Consumer Cyclical), while Microsoft Corporation sits in Software—Infrastructure (Technology). The two operate in different sectors, so cyclicality and end-market exposure differ — factor that into any portfolio overlap. TSLA carries a beta of 1.25 versus 1.27 for MSFT, meaning MSFT has historically been the more volatile of the two.

Valuation

On valuation, TSLA is the cheaper stock. TSLA trades on a forward P/E of 26.25 and EV/EBITDA of 11.17, against 16.83 and 36.41 for MSFT. Price-to-sales is 13.28 vs 15.59, and free-cash-flow yield is 4.5% vs 5.6%. 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

MSFT is the faster grower. TSLA has compounded revenue at 4.0% over three years with EPS growth of 5.0%, while MSFT has delivered 13.4% revenue and 12.8% 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, MSFT is stronger. TSLA posts a 28.6% operating margin, 23.0% return on equity and 24.1% return on invested capital. MSFT posts 18.8%, 47.0% and 31.5% 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

TSLA has the safer balance sheet. TSLA carries net-debt/EBITDA of 1.01x with a current ratio of 3.57, versus 1.00x and 1.35 for MSFT. 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 TSLA returned 19.9% against -13.8% for MSFT; on a three-year annualised basis it is 47.7% vs 4.7%. TSLA yields 0.4% and MSFT 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, TSLA is the better fit on today's multiples. Growth investors will likely prefer MSFT, which is expanding faster. Income investors should lean toward TSLA for its higher shareholder yield, while investors who prize quality-at-a-reasonable-price will favour MSFT 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: TSLA
• Growth: MSFT
• Income: TSLA
• Quality: MSFT

Frequently asked questions

Is TSLA or MSFT the better buy right now?

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

Which stock is cheaper, TSLA or MSFT?

TSLA is the cheaper stock across forward P/E (26.25 vs 16.83), EV/EBITDA (11.17 vs 36.41) and price-to-sales (13.28 vs 15.59).

Which has grown faster, TSLA or MSFT?

MSFT has the stronger growth profile, with three-year revenue CAGR of 4.0% for TSLA versus 13.4% for MSFT.

Which stock pays a bigger dividend?

TSLA yields 0.4% and MSFT yields 0.0%, so TSLA is the stronger income choice.

Related comparisons

• AAPL vs MSFT
• AAPL vs TSLA
• AMD vs MSFT
• AMZN vs MSFT
• MSFT vs AVGO
• MSFT vs CRM