At a Glance: The Q·Score

NVDA scores 9.2 ("Very Bullish") against MSFT's 8.5 ("Very Bullish") — a gap of 0.7 points on a 10-point scale. Both labels land in the same top tier, which means this is a comparison of two high-performing profiles rather than a clear-cut contrast between strength and weakness. A gap of this size typically signals that one stock holds a measurable edge across several individual dimensions without the other being fundamentally flawed — the details of where the gap opens up are what matter most here.

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 sales flows through to the bottom line. MSFT's margin of 40.3% is itself exceptional by almost any standard, but it trails NVDA's by nearly 23 percentage points. The return on equity (ROE) figures — which measure how efficiently a company generates profit from shareholders' capital — tell an even starker story: NVDA posts an ROE of 114.3% versus MSFT's 34%. An ROE above 100% reflects the degree to which NVDA is generating earnings that far exceed the book value of equity on its balance sheet, a function of both its extraordinary profitability and its capital structure. On pure profitability and capital efficiency metrics, the data gives a decisive edge to NVDA.

Health — Balance Sheet and Execution

Both tickers share strength here, with the data insufficient to separate them sharply on Health.

One metric where both companies are statistically identical is EPS beat rate — the frequency with which a company's reported earnings per share exceed analyst expectations. Both NVDA and MSFT have beaten consensus EPS estimates in 100% of the periods captured in this dataset, a remarkable consistency that reflects disciplined guidance management and underlying business momentum. Debt/equity and current ratio figures are not broken out in the available data, so the Health dimension score reflects the inputs that are present. A perfect EPS beat rate for both names means execution quality is not a differentiator here — both businesses have demonstrated a consistent ability to meet or exceed what the market expected.

Growth — Revenue, Earnings, and Surprise

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

NVDA's revenue growth of 85.2% year-over-year is the kind of figure that rarely appears in large-cap technology. For context, MSFT's 17.7% revenue growth would be considered strong for a company of its size and maturity — but against NVDA's number, it reads as a different category of expansion entirely. The earnings growth gap is even wider: NVDA's earnings grew 214.5% compared to MSFT's 31.7%. Earnings growth of that magnitude — more than tripling profits in a year — reflects both the operating leverage in NVDA's business model and the scale of demand it has been capturing. MSFT's 31.7% earnings growth is solid and above what many large-cap technology peers deliver, but the data gives the clear edge to NVDA on this dimension.

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 — sits at 15.2x for NVDA and 21.1x for MSFT. In the technology sector, forward P/E multiples have historically ranged widely, but a figure in the low-to-mid 20s is broadly considered a reasonable baseline for a mature, high-quality software business; a figure below 20x for a high-growth semiconductor company is comparatively low. NVDA's 15.2x forward P/E, set against its 85.2% revenue growth and 214.5% earnings growth, is the combination that drives its Valuation edge in the Q·Score model. On analyst consensus price targets, NVDA's implied upside from its current price of $209.66 is 45.9%, while MSFT's implied upside from $496.37 is 14.7% — a meaningful divergence in where covering analysts see room to move. The 52-week range position data is not broken out in the available dataset, but the price target gap reinforces NVDA's lead on this dimension.

Sentiment — Analyst Consensus

Both tickers are tied on the headline Sentiment metric — but NVDA has a slight structural edge.

Both NVDA and MSFT carry a positive analyst rating ratio of 95% — meaning 95% of covering analysts hold a positive view on each stock. That is an unusually high level of consensus enthusiasm for both names simultaneously. Where a marginal difference exists is in coverage breadth: NVDA is covered by 58 analysts versus MSFT's 52. A wider analyst base can reflect greater institutional interest and more diverse perspectives feeding into the consensus. The implied upside embedded in analyst price targets — 45.9% for NVDA versus 14.7% for MSFT — suggests that while sentiment is equally positive in directional terms, the magnitude of optimism priced into analyst targets is substantially higher for NVDA. MSFT's 14.7% implied upside, while positive, indicates that covering analysts see the stock as closer to fair value at its current price of $496.37.

What the Data Shows

NVDA finishes with a Q·Score of 9.2 versus MSFT's 8.5 — a 0.7-point gap driven primarily by NVDA's commanding leads in Growth and Valuation, and reinforced by its superior Quality metrics. The Sentiment dimension is effectively a draw, with both stocks sharing a 95% positive analyst rating ratio and a 100% EPS beat rate making Health similarly matched. MSFT's profile is not weak — a 40.3% profit margin, 31.7% earnings growth, and near-universal analyst positivity describe a business operating at a high level — but across the dimensions where the two diverge, the data consistently points in NVDA's direction.

Explore the Full Comparison

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