MSFT Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Salesforce has a net margin of 37.61% compared to Microsoft's net margin of 16.17%. Microsoft's return on equity of 35.68% beat Salesforce's return on equity of 10.11%.

Microsoft has a consensus price target of $508.55, signalling upside risk potential of 16.84%. On the other hand Salesforce has an analysts' consensus of $394.98 which suggests that it could grow by 15.41%. Given that Microsoft has higher upside potential than Salesforce, analysts believe Microsoft is more attractive than Salesforce.

Microsoft has a beta of 0.899, which suggesting that the stock is 10.139% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Salesforce has a beta of 1.304, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 30.388%.

Microsoft has a quarterly dividend of $0.83 per share corresponding to a yield of 0.71%. Salesforce offers a yield of 0.47% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.40 per share. Microsoft pays 24.7% of its earnings as a dividend. Salesforce pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend. Microsoft's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Microsoft quarterly revenues are $65.6B, which are larger than Salesforce quarterly revenues of $9.4B. Microsoft's net income of $24.7B is higher than Salesforce's net income of $1.5B. Notably, Microsoft's price-to-earnings ratio is 35.91x while Salesforce's PE ratio is 56.40x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Microsoft is 12.79x versus 9.00x for Salesforce. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

CrowdStrike Holdings has a net margin of 37.61% compared to Microsoft's net margin of -1.67%. Microsoft's return on equity of 35.68% beat CrowdStrike Holdings's return on equity of 4.89%.

Microsoft has a consensus price target of $508.55, signalling upside risk potential of 16.84%. On the other hand CrowdStrike Holdings has an analysts' consensus of $376.13 which suggests that it could grow by 4.05%. Given that Microsoft has higher upside potential than CrowdStrike Holdings, analysts believe Microsoft is more attractive than CrowdStrike Holdings.

Microsoft has a beta of 0.899, which suggesting that the stock is 10.139% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison CrowdStrike Holdings has a beta of 1.112, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 11.217%.

Microsoft has a quarterly dividend of $0.83 per share corresponding to a yield of 0.71%. CrowdStrike Holdings offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Microsoft pays 24.7% of its earnings as a dividend. CrowdStrike Holdings pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend. Microsoft's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Microsoft quarterly revenues are $65.6B, which are larger than CrowdStrike Holdings quarterly revenues of $1B. Microsoft's net income of $24.7B is higher than CrowdStrike Holdings's net income of -$16.8M. Notably, Microsoft's price-to-earnings ratio is 35.91x while CrowdStrike Holdings's PE ratio is 708.82x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Microsoft is 12.79x versus 24.04x for CrowdStrike Holdings. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

MicroStrategy has a net margin of 37.61% compared to Microsoft's net margin of -293.07%. Microsoft's return on equity of 35.68% beat MicroStrategy's return on equity of -16.93%.

Microsoft has a consensus price target of $508.55, signalling upside risk potential of 16.84%. On the other hand MicroStrategy has an analysts' consensus of $518.68 which suggests that it could grow by 56.12%. Given that MicroStrategy has higher upside potential than Microsoft, analysts believe MicroStrategy is more attractive than Microsoft.

Microsoft has a beta of 0.899, which suggesting that the stock is 10.139% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison MicroStrategy has a beta of 3.175, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 217.477%.

Microsoft has a quarterly dividend of $0.83 per share corresponding to a yield of 0.71%. MicroStrategy offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Microsoft pays 24.7% of its earnings as a dividend. MicroStrategy pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend. Microsoft's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Microsoft quarterly revenues are $65.6B, which are larger than MicroStrategy quarterly revenues of $116.1M. Microsoft's net income of $24.7B is higher than MicroStrategy's net income of -$340.2M. Notably, Microsoft's price-to-earnings ratio is 35.91x while MicroStrategy's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Microsoft is 12.79x versus 137.78x for MicroStrategy. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Uber Technologies has a net margin of 37.61% compared to Microsoft's net margin of 23.35%. Microsoft's return on equity of 35.68% beat Uber Technologies's return on equity of 33.34%.

Microsoft has a consensus price target of $508.55, signalling upside risk potential of 16.84%. On the other hand Uber Technologies has an analysts' consensus of $90.05 which suggests that it could grow by 45.56%. Given that Uber Technologies has higher upside potential than Microsoft, analysts believe Uber Technologies is more attractive than Microsoft.

Microsoft has a beta of 0.899, which suggesting that the stock is 10.139% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Uber Technologies has a beta of 1.330, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 33.034%.

Microsoft has a quarterly dividend of $0.83 per share corresponding to a yield of 0.71%. Uber Technologies offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Microsoft pays 24.7% of its earnings as a dividend. Uber Technologies pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend. Microsoft's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Microsoft quarterly revenues are $65.6B, which are larger than Uber Technologies quarterly revenues of $11.2B. Microsoft's net income of $24.7B is higher than Uber Technologies's net income of $2.6B. Notably, Microsoft's price-to-earnings ratio is 35.91x while Uber Technologies's PE ratio is 30.78x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Microsoft is 12.79x versus 3.14x for Uber Technologies. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.