International Business Machines's Competitiveness
A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of International Business Machines (IBM) against its publicly traded competitors: sales growth, net income, profitability, valuation and market share, plus each peer's market capitalization, revenue, income and employees. Free below: the top 5 peers. Subscriber access adds the full competitor list and CSV downloads.
Key Findings: International Business Machines vs Its Competitors
- TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 69,096M vs 2,420,640M combined for tracked competitors (2.8% combined share).
- Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is holding steady (-0.6% annualized vs trailing 12 months), vs accelerating (+5.1%) for its tracked peer group.
- Growth: International Business Machines generated 1.1% revenue growth year over year in Q2 2026, vs 18.7% for its tracked competitors combined.
- Profitability: Its 12.6% net margin compares with 23.4% for the peer group.
- Scale: International Business Machines ranks #4 of 15 companies by market capitalization in the Computer Hardware industry, holding 3.3% of industry market cap.
- Peer revenue share: International Business Machines accounted for 2.6% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group, down from 3.1% a year earlier.
- Peer differentiation: Revenue per employee of $0.23M compares with $0.58M for the peer group (0.4x).
Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).
IBM Sales vs. its Competitors, Q2 2026
International Business Machines reported revenue growth of 1.09 % year on year in Q2 2026, below its competitors' combined revenue growth of 18.67 %.
With a net margin of 12.62 %, International Business Machines reported lower profitability than its competitors (23.36 %).
International Business Machines generated 2.63 % of the combined sales of its peer group, down from 3.07 % a year earlier.
International Business Machines vs. its Competitors, Q2 2026
Revenue growth, year on year
Net income growth, year on year
Net margin
Revenue run-rate vs trailing 12 months
TTM net margin
TTM = trailing twelve months. Run-rate annualizes the latest quarter (×4) and compares it to TTM. In millions of $. High-Confidence Competitors are named as a competitor directly in an SEC filing; Similar-Size Competitors are the closest peers by market-cap rank within the same industry; Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors are the closest peers by combined revenue growth, operating margin and ROIC, all independent of the competitor list.
TTM revenue, latest-quarter run-rate and net income/margin benchmarked across International Business Machines and its 4 competitor groupings. Available under Commercial License.
| Entity | TTM Revenue | Rev Run-rate vs TTM |
|---|---|---|
| International Business Machines Corporation | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Competitors combined | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| High-Confidence Competitors (50) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar-Size Competitors (8) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
TTM revenue, run-rate and net margin benchmarking across International Business Machines's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.
For context: the Computer Hardware industry grew revenue 29.2% year over year, combined, vs 1.1% for International Business Machines. International Business Machines's share of combined industry revenue moved from 9.42% to 7.37%, a loss of 2.05 percentage points.
International Business Machines's Competitor Quality Breadth
Share of each group, trailing 12 months: profitable (net margin > 0), expanding (revenue growth > 0), growing faster than the industry's own median, and financially distressed (Piotroski F-Score of 2 or below).
| Entity | Profitable | Expanding | Above Industry Growth | Distressed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| International Business Machines Corporation | Yes | Yes | No | No |
| Competitors combined (110) | ||||
| High-Confidence Competitors (72) | ||||
| Similar-Size Competitors (8) |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Altman Z-Score is not shown here: it is not populated in the underlying data for any company. Percentages are of companies in each group that report the relevant metric, not of the full group size.
IBM Stock Performance relative to its Competitors
IBM Stock Performance relative to High-Confidence Competitors
IBM Stock Performance relative to Similar-Size Competitors
5 Best-Performing Tracked Competitors, Trailing 12 Months
| # | Competitor | TTM Share Price Return | vs U.S.A. 500 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Dell Technologies Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 2 | Digitalocean Holdings Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 3 | Advanced Micro Devices Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 4 | Intel Corporation | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 5 | Quantum Corp | 282.9% | Outperformed |
TTM share price return and U.S.A. 500 outperformance for International Business Machines's best-performing tracked competitors requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months.
International Business Machines's Comment on Competition and Industry Peers
The principal methods of competition for IBM include technology innovation, performance, pricing, quality, brand recognition, breadth of capabilities, products, and services, talent acquisition, client relationships and trust, ability to deliver business value, and service and support. To maintain leadership, IBM optimizes its portfolio through both organic and inorganic innovations and effective resource allocation. These investments not only drive current performance but also extend IBM's innovation leadership into the future.
IBM's breadth and depth of expertise enable it to integrate various technologies to address the most pressing business challenges of its clients. The company differentiates itself from other providers by leveraging its incumbency with enterprises, deep expertise in technology, industries, and business processes, a broad go-to-market reach including an ecosystem of partners and alliances, and a strong focus on innovation. These attributes position IBM for accelerated growth and prepare it for future business opportunities, such as quantum computing.
Overall, IBM holds a leadership position or ranks among the leaders in each of its business segments. A summary of the competitive environment for each business segment is provided below:
In the software segment, IBM's depth, breadth, and innovation of software offerings, coupled with its global reach, industry expertise, and research capabilities, differentiate its offerings from competitors. Principal competitors include Alphabet (Google), Amazon, BMC, Broadcom, Cisco Systems, Informatica, Microsoft, Oracle, Palo Alto Networks, Salesforce, SAP, Splunk, and VMware.
In the consulting segment, IBM competes in a dynamic market against companies such as Accenture, Capgemini, India-based service providers, management consulting firms, public accounting firms' consulting practices, engineering service providers, and companies focusing on local markets or niche service areas.
In the infrastructure segment, IBM is well positioned in the growing hybrid cloud infrastructure market, offering on-premises and cloud-based server and storage solutions. Principal competitors include Dell Technologies, Hewlett-Packard Enterprise (HPE), Intel, NetApp, Pure Storage, and original device manufacturers (ODMs).
In the financing segment, IBM provides client and commercial financing, competing primarily with non-captive financing entities and financial institutions. Key competitive factors include interest rates, IT product experience, client service, contract flexibility, ease of doing business, global capabilities, and residual values.
Publicly Traded Peers of International Business Machines Corporation
Revenue and income for trailing 12 months, in millions of $, except employees| Company | Market Cap | Revenues |
|---|---|---|
| International Business Machines Corporation | 210,356.66 | 69,096.00 |
| Apple Inc | 4,979,446.36 | 466,823.00 |
| Microsoft Corporation | 3,795,216.66 | 331,839.00 |
| Amazon com Inc | 2,683,773.45 | 776,231.00 |
| Broadcom Inc | 1,708,348.59 | 89,104.00 |
| Advanced Micro Devices Inc | 1,008,456.33 | 40,524.00 |
| SUBTOTAL | 17,795,309.67 | 2,842,208.32 |
Sign in to see all competitors of International Business Machines Corporation.
Sources: International Business Machines Corporation's official press releases and regulatory filings; CSIMarket.com's market research; and the financial filings and press releases of the other companies cited.
Updated on:
Focus of this report: publicly traded companies. Ten additional tables on International Business Machines Corporation versus competitors, including market share analysis, are in the navigation menu under Competition. To download the tables, please subscribe.
International Business Machines's Competitors Named by the Company
Competitive relationships identified from SEC filings and corroborating sources, each with a basis and confidence.| Competitor | Basis | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| Quantum Corp | Named by the company | 85% |
| Sailpoint Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Gbt Technologies Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Altair Engineering Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Strategy Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Bubblr Inc. | Named by the company | 85% |
| Veritone Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Leidos Holdings Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Maximus Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Aiadvertising Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Nutanix Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Commvault Systems Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Plum Acquisition Corp I | Named by the company | 85% |
| Digitalocean Holdings Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Quantum Computing Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Epam Systems Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Firefly Neuroscience Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Splunk Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Axon Enterprise Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Tenable Holdings Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Iqvia Holdings Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Magic Software Enterprises Ltd | Named by the company | 85% |
| Cognyte Software Ltd | Named by the company | 85% |
| Wns holdings Limited | Named by the company | 85% |
| New Relic Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Cognizant Technology Solutions Corporation | Named by the company | 85% |
| Everpure Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Datadog Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Qualys Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Data Storage Corporation | Named by the company | 85% |
| Sify Technologies Ltd | Named by the company | 85% |
| Health Catalyst Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Appian Corporation | Named by the company | 85% |
| Solarwinds Corporation | Named by the company | 85% |
| Informatica Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Manhattan Associates Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| BMP AI Technologies, Inc. | Named by the company | 85% |
| Vmware Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Microsoft Corporation | Named by the company | 85% |
| Pc Connection Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
Filing basis, confidence, active dates and source counts for International Business Machines's named competitors require a Commercial License.
Methodology: relationships are extracted from SEC filings (named-competitor disclosures) and corroborating sources. Named by the company = explicitly disclosed as a competitor; Inferred = derived from corroborating signals. Confidence reflects evidence strength.
International Business Machines's Productivity vs Peers Comparison
Revenue and income per employee, trailing 12 months, in $; market cap in millions of $| Company | Market Cap | Revenue / Employee | Income / Employee |
|---|---|---|---|
| International Business Machines Corporation | 210,357 | 226,322 | 35,129 |
| Apple Inc | 4,979,446 | 2,812,187 | 776,687 |
| Microsoft Corporation | 3,795,217 | 1,488,067 | 599,771 |
| Amazon com Inc | 2,683,773 | 492,532 | 85,838 |
| Broadcom Inc | 1,708,349 | 2,700,121 | 1,159,545 |
| Advanced Micro Devices Inc | 1,008,456 | 1,307,226 | 207,548 |
| PEERS TOTAL | 17,584,953 | 578,343 | 104,899 |
Sign in to see all peers for International Business Machines Corporation.
International Business Machines's Geographic Revenue Exposure vs Peers
Revenue by country/region as reported in each company's most recent filing. Disclosure granularity varies by filer (some report by country, others by broad region) and is shown as disclosed.| Company | Largest Market |
|---|---|
| International Business Machines Corporation | Americas 49.04 % |
| Microsoft Corporation | US 51.47 % |
| Broadcom Inc | Asia Pacific 60.15 % |
| Oracle Corporation | Americas 63.46 % |
| Dell Technologies Inc | United States 55.61 % |
| Marvell Technology Inc | China 43.75 % |
Source: revenue geography as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API. Percentages are of that company's own total consolidated revenue for its most recent reported period.
Sign in to see all peers for International Business Machines Corporation.
International Business Machines's Business Segment Mix vs Peers
Revenue by operating segment, as named and reported by each company. Segment names are the filer's own and are not standardized across companies. Do not assume a same-named or similarly-named segment is defined identically between two companies. Shares are of each company's own total revenue and are not required to sum to 100% (intersegment revenue, unallocated items).| Company | Largest Segment |
|---|---|
| International Business Machines Corporation | Software 45.22 % |
| Apple Inc | Americas 41.84 % |
| Microsoft Corporation | Productivity and Business Processes 42.19 % |
| Amazon com Inc | North America 57.75 % |
| Broadcom Inc | Semiconductor Solutions 64.81 % |
| Advanced Micro Devices Inc | Data Center 57.80 % |
Source: operating segment revenue as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API, leaf-level reportable segments only (parent roll-up segments are excluded where sub-segments are separately disclosed).
Sign in to see all peers for International Business Machines Corporation.
International Business Machines's Position in Industry Market Structure
Market-capitalization share and concentration across all 15 companies in International Business Machines's industry classification, broader than the peer set above. Market cap in millions of $.International Business Machines ranks #4 of 15 companies by market capitalization in its industry, holding 3.26 % of total industry market cap. The industry's Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) is 6,194, indicating a highly concentrated market structure (U.S. antitrust guidance: below 1,500 unconcentrated, 1,500 to 2,500 moderately concentrated, above 2,500 highly concentrated).
| Rank | Company | Market Cap | Industry Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Apple Inc | 5,038,673 | 78.20 % |
| 2 | Dell Technologies Inc | 357,518 | 5.55 % |
| 3 | Sandisk Corporation | 266,499 | 4.14 % |
| 4 | International Business Machines Corporation | 210,099 | 3.26 % |
| 5 | Seagate Technology Holdings Plc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 6 | Western Digital Corporation | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 7 | Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 8 | Netapp Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 9 | Super Micro Computer Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 10 | Hp inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
Market cap and industry share for the rest of International Business Machines's industry peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation) across CSIMarket's industry classification, market capitalization as of 2026-09-28.
International Business Machines's Same-Size Peers & Stock Performance
Peers chosen by closeness in market-cap rank within the same industry classification (not the named-competitor list above). Trailing 12-month total return, 3-month price momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio vs the broad U.S. market.| Rank | Company | Market Cap | TTM Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Apple Inc | 5,038,673 | 33.31 % |
| 2 | Dell Technologies Inc | 357,518 | 318.71 % |
| 3 | Sandisk Corporation | 266,499 | 1,723.47 % |
| 4 | International Business Machines Corporation | 210,099 | -21.69 % |
| 5 | Seagate Technology Holdings Plc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 6 | Western Digital Corporation | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 7 | Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 8 | Netapp Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 9 | Super Micro Computer Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
Market cap, return, momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio for the rest of International Business Machines's same-size peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation); returns and risk metrics as of 2026-09-28. Beta and Sharpe ratio are versus the broad U.S. equity market, not this industry.
International Business Machines's Profitability & Cost Structure
Trailing 12-month margins from SEC-filed financials. Operating margin is compared to the Computer Hardware industry median; gross margin, EBITDA margin and capital intensity are compared to the live industry average (21 companies).| Metric | Company | Industry | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 58.10 % | 43.10 % (avg) | +15.0 pp |
| Operating Margin | - | industry median | - |
| EBITDA Margin | 24.73 % | 10.35 % (avg) | +14.4 pp |
| Capital Intensity (Capex / Revenue) | 1.59 % | 2.38 % (avg) | -0.8 pp |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. SG&A and R&D as a share of revenue have limited coverage as this data is backfilled and appear only where reported. Higher capital intensity is not inherently negative; it reflects the industry's asset requirements.
International Business Machines's Valuation vs Competitive Position
Valuation multiples vs the Computer Hardware industry average (21 companies, excluding loss-making/negative-equity outliers), alongside returns on capital for context on whether a premium or discount lines up with measurably stronger or weaker returns.| Metric | Company | Industry Average | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| P/E | 22.4x | 33.7x | -11.3x |
| EV / EBITDA | 20.0x | 20.6x | -0.6x |
| P/B | 7.5x | 9.0x | -1.5x |
| Return on Equity | 33.43 % | industry aggregate | -70.48 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | - | 10.31 % (avg) | - |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. A valuation premium or discount is not, by itself, a judgment of over- or under-valuation. Compare it against the return and growth context shown elsewhere on this page.
International Business Machines's Multi-Year Financial Trajectory
Fiscal-year revenue growth, operating margin, return on invested capital and P/E, as reported in SEC filings.| Metric | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | 0.57 % | -3.07 % | -4.57 % | -3.84 % | -14.50 % | 2.20 % | 1.44 % | 7.62 % |
| Operating Margin | 15.16 % | 14.92 % | 8.05 % | 8.46 % | 3.92 % | 16.64 % | 14.95 % | 17.50 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | 11.48 % | 9.07 % | 4.36 % | 4.66 % | 2.03 % | 8.44 % | 5.75 % | 6.64 % |
| P/E | 12.2x | 12.3x | 19.7x | 19.8x | 82.4x | 20.1x | 34.7x | 27.1x |
Source: CSIMarket API, fiscal-year figures. P/E is this company's own historical ratio at each fiscal year end and can swing sharply around an earnings trough: that is real, not a data error.
International Business Machines's BCG Growth-Share Matrix
Relative market share (vs International Business Machines's largest competitor by market cap) against industry revenue growth, using the standard textbook thresholds (1.0x share, 10% growth) — a common framework, not a precision instrument.
International Business Machines falls in the Dog quadrant: relative market share of 0.04x vs its largest competitor, in an industry growing revenue 9.0% (median, trailing 12 months).
Source: CSIMarket API (market-cap share and industry revenue growth). The 10% growth and 1.0x share lines are standard textbook thresholds, not derived from this industry's own distribution. A caveat worth reading alongside this chart: Apple Inc alone holds 78% of this industry's market cap. In an industry this dominated by one leader, the framework will place nearly every OTHER company in "Dog" or "Question Mark" purely because relative share is measured against that leader, regardless of how strong those other companies actually are on their own fundamentals. Check the Profitability, Valuation and Financial Strength sections above before treating this quadrant label as a verdict.
International Business Machines's Competitive Forces (Porter's Five Forces)
Only the forces this data can support honestly are shown; the other three are marked as such rather than guessed.| Force | Assessment | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Competitive Rivalry | Low | Industry HHI of 6,194 (see Industry Market Structure & Concentration above) |
| Barriers to Entry | Lower than typical for the industry | Capital intensity (capex / revenue) of 1.59 % vs industry average 2.38 % (see Profitability & Cost Structure above) |
| Supplier Power | Not covered on this page | See International Business Machines's dedicated suppliers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Buyer Power | Not covered on this page | See International Business Machines's dedicated customers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Threat of Substitutes | - | No systematic data source for cross-product substitution exists in this system; not estimated |
Note: this is a partial, data-grounded application of the framework, not a complete strategic assessment. Rivalry and barriers-to-entry readings are mechanical translations of the HHI and capital-intensity figures shown elsewhere on this page, not independent judgments.
International Business Machines's Industry Attractiveness & Competitive Strength
A CSIMarket composite, not a standard field: each axis is an equal-weighted average of three factors already shown elsewhere on this page (industry growth, industry profitability and rivalry for attractiveness; relative market share, profitability and growth vs industry for strength). Disclosed as a designed methodology, not a precision measurement.
International Business Machines falls in the Medium attractiveness / Medium strength cell: Selective.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Each axis score is a simple 1(low)/2(medium)/3(high) average across its three inputs -- a transparent, disclosed simplification, not a validated academic scoring model.
International Business Machines's SWOT
Every point below is a fixed rule applied to a metric already shown elsewhere on this page (Market Structure, Profitability, Valuation, Run-Rate, Stock Performance, Quality Breadth) — not an independent strategic assessment. A blank quadrant means no rule was met, not that none apply.Strengths
No rule matched.
Weaknesses
- Return on equity 70.5 points below the industry aggregate.
- Underperforming the U.S.A. 500 over the trailing 12 months.
- Low relative market share vs the industry leader (0.04x).
Opportunities
No rule matched.
Threats
- Industry dominated by Apple Inc , holding 78.20 % of industry market cap.
- Losing revenue share to the broader industry (-2.1 points over the past year).
Methodology: mechanical, rule-based SWOT. Each bullet reuses a figure already sourced and cited elsewhere on this page; nothing here is generated narrative or independent analyst judgment.
International Business Machines's Financial Strength vs Peers Comparison
Quick ratio, working capital, debt to equity and asset turnover, trailing 12 months| Company | Quick Ratio | Working Capital | Debt / Equity |
|---|---|---|---|
| International Business Machines Corporation | 0.29 | 0.87 | 3.47 |
| Apple Inc | 0.26 | 0.96 | 0.99 |
| Microsoft Corporation | 0.13 | 1.31 | 0.11 |
| Amazon com Inc | 0.38 | 1.07 | 0.21 |
| Broadcom Inc | 0.99 | 2.05 | 0.75 |
| Advanced Micro Devices Inc | 0.48 | 2.61 | 0.05 |
Sign in to see all peers for International Business Machines Corporation.
Quick ratio = cash / current liabilities; working capital ratio = current assets / current liabilities; asset turnover = revenue / total assets. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
International Business Machines's Revenue and Income Growth vs Peers
Quarterly revenue and net income growth, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Revenue Y/Y | Income Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| International Business Machines Corporation | Q2 2026 | +1.1 % | -1.3 % |
| Apple Inc | Q2 2026 | +16.4 % | +27.1 % |
| Microsoft Corporation | Q2 2026 | +17.7 % | +31.3 % |
| Amazon com Inc | Q2 2026 | +19.9 % | +244.9 % |
| Broadcom Inc | Q2 2026 | +85.5 % | +216.1 % |
| Advanced Micro Devices Inc | Q2 2026 | +55.4 % | +163.4 % |
| PEERS TOTAL | +18.2 % | +53.1 % |
Sign in to see all peers for International Business Machines Corporation.
Growth is shown only where both periods are positive. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
International Business Machines's Peers' Costs of Sales and Capital Expenditures
Context for revenue growth: peer costs and capex, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Costs Y/Y | Capex Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| International Business Machines Corporation | Q2 2026 | +3.6 % | +9.0 % |
| Apple Inc | Q2 2026 | +8.6 % | -29.1 % |
| Microsoft Corporation | Q2 2026 | +22.9 % | +109.6 % |
| Amazon com Inc | Q2 2026 | +18.5 % | +300.3 % |
| Broadcom Inc | Q2 2026 | +74.0 % | +274.6 % |
| Advanced Micro Devices Inc | Q2 2026 | +138.3 % | +186.5 % |
Sign in to see all peers for International Business Machines Corporation.
International Business Machines's Returns and Turnover vs Peers
ROA, ROI and ROE (trailing 12 months), receivables and inventory turnover| Company | ROA | ROI | ROE |
|---|---|---|---|
| International Business Machines Corporation | 7.07% | 7.03% | 33.43% |
| Apple Inc | 35.02% | 60.14% | 142.67% |
| Microsoft Corporation | 19.76% | 22.48% | 34.22% |
| Amazon com Inc | 15.21% | 23.40% | 30.50% |
| Broadcom Inc | 21.57% | 24.07% | 43.74% |
| Advanced Micro Devices Inc | 8.10% | 9.43% | 10.07% |
Sign in to see all peers for International Business Machines Corporation.
ROA = net income / total assets; ROI = net income / investments; ROE = net income / equity; turnover ratios use trailing 12 month revenue (receivables) and cost of sales (inventory).
International Business Machines's Valuation vs Peers
P/E, price to sales, PEG, price to cash flow and price to book| Company | P/E | Price / Sales |
|---|---|---|
| International Business Machines Corporation | 19.55 | 3.04 |
| Apple Inc | 38.90 | 10.67 |
| Microsoft Corporation | 28.37 | 11.44 |
| Amazon com Inc | 19.79 | 3.46 |
| Broadcom Inc | 44.53 | 19.17 |
| Advanced Micro Devices Inc | 156.26 | 24.89 |
| PEERS AVERAGE | 34.64 | 6.26 |
Sign in to see all peers for International Business Machines Corporation.
P/E = price / diluted EPS (trailing 12 months); PEG = P/E divided by EPS growth; the average row divides the peers' combined market cap by their combined income, sales, cash flow and equity.