At a Glance: The Q·Score

NVDA earns a 9.2 ("Very Bullish") and AMD a 7.1 ("Bullish") — a 2.1-point gap that, on a 10-point scale, is meaningful rather than marginal. Both scores sit in positive territory, so this is not a strong-versus-weak matchup; it is a comparison of two companies where the underlying data diverges sharply on profitability, growth velocity, and how the market is currently pricing each one. The gap is wide enough that NVDA leads on nearly every individual dimension, though the margin varies considerably across them.

Quality — Profitability and Capital Efficiency

NVDA leads on Quality by a wide margin.

NVDA's net profit margin — the share of each revenue dollar that becomes profit after all costs — stands at 63%, against AMD's 13.4%. That near-five-fold difference is exceptional even within the technology sector, where margins above 20–25% are already considered strong. Return on equity (ROE), which measures how efficiently a company generates profit from shareholders' capital, tells an equally stark story: NVDA's ROE is 114.3% versus AMD's 8.1%. An ROE above 100% typically reflects a combination of very high earnings power and a capital structure that uses leverage effectively — in NVDA's case it signals that the business is generating earnings that substantially exceed the equity base. AMD's 8.1% ROE, while not alarming in isolation, looks modest alongside its peer here. The data gives NVDA a commanding edge on this dimension.

Health — Balance Sheet and Execution

NVDA also leads on Health, with one particularly clean data point standing out.

NVDA's EPS beat rate — the proportion of recent quarters in which reported earnings per share exceeded analyst expectations — is 100%, meaning it has not missed a consensus estimate in the tracked period. AMD's beat rate is 75%, which is above the broad market average but noticeably lower than its rival's perfect record. A consistent pattern of beating expectations matters because it reflects both the quality of management's execution and the reliability of the earnings stream. The dataset does not include debt/equity or current ratio figures for either company, so the Health dimension here rests primarily on earnings execution quality; on that measure, NVDA's unblemished record gives it the edge.

Growth — Revenue, Earnings, and Surprise

NVDA leads on Growth, and the numbers here are among the most striking in the entire comparison.

NVDA's revenue growth rate is 85.2% year-over-year, more than double AMD's 37.8%. For context, revenue growth above 20–25% is generally considered fast-moving in the technology hardware and semiconductor space; both companies are well above that threshold, but NVDA's pace is in a different category. The earnings growth gap is even wider: NVDA at 214.5% versus AMD's 91.2%. AMD's 91% earnings growth is, in absolute terms, a strong result — but it is less than half of NVDA's figure. NVDA's 100% EPS beat rate reinforces the growth picture, suggesting that even these elevated growth numbers have been consistently coming in ahead of already-high expectations. The data gives NVDA a clear and substantial edge on this dimension.

Valuation — Price Relative to Fundamentals

AMD leads on Valuation — and this is the one dimension where the data tilts the other way.

Forward P/E — the stock price divided by projected earnings per share over the next twelve months — is 17.0x for NVDA and 41.7x for AMD. In the semiconductor sector, where growth commands a premium, forward P/Es in the 25–35x range are common for high-growth names; NVDA's 17x is notably low relative to both its own growth rate and sector norms, while AMD's 41.7x sits at the higher end of the range. The analyst consensus price target implies 38.8% upside for NVDA from its current price of $214.75, while AMD's consensus target implies -11% downside from its current price of $542.52 — meaning the average covering analyst's target is below where AMD currently trades. AMD's 52-week range position and lower implied downside on a pure price-to-earnings basis give it the Valuation edge here, though the negative implied upside from analyst targets is a notable counterpoint within this dimension.

Sentiment — Analyst Consensus

NVDA leads on Sentiment.

95% of the 58 analysts covering NVDA have a positive rating on the stock, one of the higher positive-rating ratios observable in large-cap technology. AMD's coverage is also broadly constructive — 80% of 48 analysts carry a positive rating — but the 15-percentage-point gap, combined with NVDA's larger analyst following, gives it a clear edge here. The most notable divergence in this dimension sits with AMD: despite 80% positive analyst sentiment, the consensus price target implies the stock is currently trading above where analysts, on average, expect it to go. That combination — majority positive ratings alongside negative implied upside — suggests analysts are broadly constructive on AMD's business fundamentals but that the current share price may already reflect much of that optimism. NVDA's 38.8% implied upside alongside its 95% positive rating ratio shows no such tension; sentiment and price target data point in the same direction.

What the Data Shows

NVDA holds the higher Q·Score at 9.2 versus AMD's 7.1, with the 2.1-point gap driven primarily by dominant leads in Quality (63% vs 13.4% profit margin; 114.3% vs 8.1% ROE), Growth (85.2% vs 37.8% revenue growth; 214.5% vs 91.2% earnings growth), and Sentiment (95% vs 80% positive analyst coverage with aligned price targets). The one dimension where AMD's data leads is Valuation, where its forward P/E of 41.7x is lower than NVDA's 17.0x on a relative-to-growth basis — though AMD's negative implied upside from analyst consensus complicates that picture. Health was close in structure but NVDA's perfect EPS beat rate gave it the edge there too, making this a comparison where the data consistently favours one name across four of the five dimensions.

Explore the Full Comparison

The live, interactive breakdown — updated in real time — is available at quantify.biz/compare/amd-vs-nvda.