Visa Inc. (V)vs Mastercard Incorporated (MA)

Quick verdict

The widest gap between these two payment networks is in what they earn on the capital they employ. On a return-on-invested-capital basis, Mastercard converted invested capital into profit at 86.97% against Visa's 46.79% — both exceptional, but close to double. The return-on-equity figures (241.11% for Mastercard, 60.35% for Visa) exaggerate the difference, because Mastercard's shareholders' equity had shrunk to $5.6bn by 30 June 2026 after years of buybacks, against Visa's $35.7bn at 31 March 2026. Elsewhere the pair are remarkably alike: our scoring closes at three points each, both tagged high-quality, with valuation, growth, quality and momentum all judged too close to call. Visa takes the balance-sheet factor on lower leverage and stronger interest cover; Mastercard takes the income factor on a larger dividend yield and a substantial buyback. Scale favours Visa: $43.0bn of revenue versus $35.1bn.

At-a-glance comparison

Business model and revenue mix

Both firms sit in the same niche of Financial Services — credit services — and neither takes credit risk on the cards carrying its brand. Visa runs a global payments network and earns fees on the transactions it processes rather than lending money itself; Mastercard operates the equivalent network and charges fees for processing card and, increasingly, account-to-account transactions. The economics are toll-booth in character, which is why margins on both sides run far above the market norm. Size is the clearest separator: Visa's revenue of $43.0bn in the twelve months to March 2026 exceeded Mastercard's $35.1bn in the twelve months to June 2026, and Visa's net income of $22.2bn likewise topped Mastercard's $16.3bn. Fiscal calendars differ — Visa closes its year in September, Mastercard in December — so the trailing periods here are not identical.

Valuation

Valuation is scored a tie, and the data behind that call is one-sided: our provider returned multiples for Mastercard but not for Visa, so a direct like-for-like comparison of the two price tags is not possible from these figures. For Mastercard, at the 4 September 2026 close of $579.21 the shares carried a market capitalisation of $511.4bn, a trailing P/E of 31.86 on earnings per share of $18.18, 14.58 times sales, and an EV/EBITDA of 24.23. The free-cash-flow yield was 3.27% and the PEG ratio 1.84, the latter reflecting that the earnings growth rate discussed below is substantial relative to the earnings multiple. Price-to-book of 91.15 is not informative here, because the buyback-depleted $5.6bn equity base makes book value an arbitrary denominator for an asset-light network.

Growth profile

Measured from the 2022 fiscal year to the 2025 fiscal year, Mastercard compounded revenue at 13.82% a year against Visa's 10.92%; stretching back to the 2020 base year, the figures are 16.47% and 12.86% respectively. The five-year numbers on both sides start from a fiscal 2020 affected by depressed travel and cross-border volumes, so they flatter the underlying run-rate for each company equally. Mastercard also shows earnings compounding of 17.36% over three years and 21.00% over five, ahead of its own revenue growth — operating leverage plus a shrinking share count. No equivalent EPS growth series was returned for Visa, so the earnings comparison cannot be completed. Mastercard has grown faster on every revenue measure available, yet the verdict is a tie because the margin is a few percentage points on a like-for-like basis rather than a step change.

Profitability and quality

Margins are where Visa edges ahead. Operating margin, reported directly by both companies, stood at 61.12% for Visa in the twelve months to March 2026 against 58.33% for Mastercard in the twelve months to June 2026; net margin was 51.68% versus 46.34%. In absolute terms Visa turned $43.0bn of revenue into $26.3bn of operating profit and $21.2bn of free cash flow, while Mastercard turned $35.1bn into $20.5bn and $16.7bn respectively. Cash conversion is strong on both sides, with free cash flow close to three-quarters of operating profit in each case. The quality factor is scored a tie for good reason: Visa's superior margins are offset by Mastercard's faster growth and higher return on capital, and neither firm is meaningfully closer to the other on the fundamentals that drive the payments-network model.

Balance-sheet risk

On leverage, Visa holds the advantage and this is the one structural factor our scoring awards outright. Net debt to EBITDA stood at 0.42 times for Visa at 31 March 2026 against 0.62 times for Mastercard at 30 June 2026, and interest cover was 42.34 times versus 27.36 times — a wide gap in favour of Visa despite similar gross borrowings of $24.0bn and $24.6bn. Cash balances were $12.4bn and $11.3bn respectively. Current ratios are almost identical at 1.09 and 1.06, both only marginally above one, which is typical for networks that settle transactions continuously rather than carrying inventory. Neither balance sheet looks stretched on these measures; the difference is one of degree, with Visa carrying slightly less debt against a larger earnings base and therefore absorbing interest costs more comfortably.

Price performance and shareholder returns

Return on invested capital is the metric to weigh here, and Mastercard's 86.97% is close to double Visa's 46.79%. Both figures sit in territory few listed companies reach, reflecting networks that need little fixed capital to carry additional volume. The return-on-equity comparison — 241.11% for Mastercard against 60.35% for Visa — should be read with care rather than at face value: Mastercard's equity base had been reduced to $5.6bn by 30 June 2026 through sustained buybacks, alongside a 3.09% buyback yield, which mechanically inflates the ratio. Visa's $35.7bn of equity at 31 March 2026 makes its 60.35% the more conservatively stated of the two. Even adjusting for that distortion by leaning on ROIC, Mastercard deploys capital more productively, and this is the clearest quantitative separation on the page.

Which stock fits which investor

Income seekers have the clearer choice: Mastercard yielded 0.58% at the 4 September 2026 close against Visa's 0.18%, paid $3.37 per share over the trailing year, and returned a further 3.09% via buybacks from a payout ratio of just 17.96% — lower than Visa's 21.94%, leaving room on both sides. Growth-oriented buyers also lean towards Mastercard, given revenue compounding of 13.82% over three years and EPS compounding of 17.36% on the same basis. Value-focused investors have no clean answer: valuation is a tie, and multiples were returned for only one of the two. Those prioritising balance-sheet conservatism may prefer Visa, with net debt at 0.42 times EBITDA and 42.34 times interest cover. Overall the scoring closes level at three points each, with both carrying a high-quality style tag.

• Value: Too close to call
• Growth: MA
• Income: MA
• Quality: MA

Frequently asked questions

Which company earns more on its capital, Visa or Mastercard?

Mastercard, by a wide margin. Its return on invested capital was 86.97% against Visa's 46.79%. The return-on-equity gap looks even larger — 241.11% versus 60.35% — but Mastercard's equity had fallen to $5.6bn by 30 June 2026 after sustained buybacks, which inflates that ratio.

Which is the bigger business?

Visa. It generated $43.0bn of revenue and $22.2bn of net income in the twelve months to March 2026, against Mastercard's $35.1bn and $16.3bn in the twelve months to June 2026 — roughly a fifth larger on the top line.

Which pays the better dividend?

Mastercard, at a 0.58% yield on the 4 September 2026 close, versus 0.18% for Visa. Mastercard paid $3.37 per share over the trailing year from a payout ratio of 17.96%, and added a 3.09% buyback yield on top.

Is Visa or Mastercard cheaper?

That cannot be settled from this data. Valuation multiples were returned for Mastercard only — a trailing P/E of 31.86, 14.58 times sales and EV/EBITDA of 24.23 at the 4 September 2026 close — with no comparable figures for Visa, which is why the valuation factor is scored a tie.

Which has the stronger balance sheet?

Visa. Net debt was 0.42 times EBITDA against Mastercard's 0.62 times, and interest cover was 42.34 times versus 27.36 times, despite similar total debt of $24.0bn and $24.6bn respectively.