At a Glance: The Q·Score

NVDA scores 9.2 ("Very Bullish") against MSFT's 8.7 ("Very Bullish") — a gap of 0.5 points. Both stocks share the same top-tier label, which means the difference is one of degree rather than kind. In Q·Score terms, a half-point gap within the same label typically signals that one company holds a measurable edge in specific dimensions while the overall picture remains strong for both. The sections below show exactly where that edge comes from.

Quality — Profitability and Capital Efficiency

NVDA leads on Quality.

NVDA's net profit margin — the percentage of revenue that becomes profit after all costs — stands at 63%, meaning roughly 63 cents of every dollar in revenue flows through to the bottom line. That is an exceptional figure by any standard in the technology sector. MSFT's 39.3% margin is itself elite, but it trails NVDA by nearly 24 percentage points. The gap is even wider on return on equity (ROE) — a measure of how efficiently a company generates profit from shareholders' capital — where NVDA posts 114.3% against MSFT's 34%. An ROE above 100% reflects the extraordinary leverage NVDA's earnings are generating relative to its equity base. Both companies generate strong free cash flow (cash left after capital expenditures), but the raw profitability metrics give the Quality edge clearly to NVDA.

Health — Balance Sheet and Execution

This dimension is closely contested, with both companies showing notable strength in execution.

One of the clearest data points available here is EPS beat rate — the percentage of recent quarters in which a company's reported earnings per share exceeded analyst expectations. Both NVDA and MSFT score a perfect 100% on this measure, meaning neither has missed a consensus earnings estimate in the tracked period. That level of execution consistency is rare and speaks to the forecasting discipline and operational reliability of both businesses. Without diverging debt/equity or current ratio figures in the provided data, the Health dimension does not produce a meaningful separation between the two, and the Q·Score reflects that near-parity.

Growth — Revenue, Earnings, and Surprise

NVDA leads on Growth — and it isn't close.

NVDA's revenue grew at 85.2% year-over-year, while MSFT's came in at 18.3%. For context, 18.3% revenue growth would be considered strong for a company of MSFT's scale — most large-cap technology companies would be pleased with that figure. But NVDA's 85.2% is in a different category entirely, reflecting the sustained surge in demand for AI accelerator chips. The earnings growth figures are even more dramatic: NVDA posted 214.5% earnings growth versus MSFT's 23.4%. To put that in plain terms, NVDA's earnings more than tripled over the comparison period, while MSFT's grew by roughly a quarter. Both companies also carry a 100% EPS beat rate, so the growth numbers are not being flattered by lowered expectations — analysts have consistently underestimated NVDA's results. The Growth dimension is the single largest driver of NVDA's higher overall Q·Score.

Valuation — Price Relative to Fundamentals

NVDA leads on Valuation.

Forward P/E — the stock price divided by projected earnings per share over the next twelve months — is the primary lens here. NVDA trades at a forward P/E of approximately 16.8, while MSFT trades at approximately 21.3. In the large-cap technology sector, forward P/E ratios have historically ranged from the mid-teens to the low thirties depending on growth profile and market conditions, so both figures sit within a recognisable range. The notable observation is that NVDA, despite its dramatically faster growth, carries the lower multiple of the two — a combination that the Valuation dimension rewards. On analyst consensus price targets, NVDA's implied upside from its current price of $212.60 is 39.1%, while MSFT's implied upside from $412.67 is 35.9%. Both figures represent the gap between the current price and the average analyst price target across covering analysts, and both are substantial — but NVDA's is modestly wider. The data gives the Valuation edge to NVDA on both the multiple and the implied upside measures.

Sentiment — Analyst Consensus

This dimension is effectively tied.

Both NVDA and MSFT show a positive analyst rating ratio of 95% — meaning 95% of covering analysts have a positive rating on each stock. NVDA is covered by 58 analysts and MSFT by 54, giving NVDA a slightly broader coverage base, but the sentiment signal itself is virtually identical. It is worth pausing on what a 95% positive rating ratio means in practice: out of every 20 analysts covering these stocks, 19 hold a positive view. That level of consensus is high even by the standards of mega-cap technology. One nuance worth noting is that for NVDA, the extremely strong sentiment aligns tightly with the fundamental data — the growth and profitability numbers provide clear justification. For MSFT, the same 95% positive ratio sits alongside more moderate growth figures, suggesting analysts are placing weight on factors such as business model durability, cloud infrastructure positioning, and earnings consistency rather than near-term growth velocity alone.

What the Data Shows

NVDA finishes with a Q·Score of 9.2 against MSFT's 8.7, a 0.5-point gap within a shared "Very Bullish" label. The gap is driven primarily by the Growth dimension, where NVDA's 85.2% revenue growth and 214.5% earnings growth represent a generational outlier, and secondarily by the Valuation dimension, where NVDA's lower forward P/E of 16.8 contrasts with MSFT's 21.3 despite NVDA's faster expansion. Quality also favours NVDA on the headline metrics, though MSFT's 39.3% profit margin and 34% ROE are strong in absolute terms. The Sentiment dimension is essentially a draw at 95% positive ratings for both, and Health shows parity on the execution measure available.

Explore the Full Comparison

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