Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Applied Materials, Inc.
How Applied Materials, Inc. stacks up
AMAT · against 27 other Technology companies of similar size
Growth
57/ 100
Near the bottom of its peers.
Ranked #21 of 28 · scores higher than 22% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the growth score4 peers with a growth score of 50–59, including AMAT · Click a bar to see the companies
Why growth scores 57?
Weighted metrics compared with all Technology companies.Its metrics sit close to the Technology norm.
- Revenue growth is close to the peer norm. Revenue growth: 7.8% vs peer median 8.5%
- 3-year revenue growth is close to the peer norm. 3-year revenue growth: 5.1% vs peer median 4.8%
- faster growth in earnings per share: stronger than 70% of peers. Earnings per share growth: 36.2% vs peer median 11.1%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = AMAT, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | AMAT | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue growthHigher is better · 28 reported | 7.8% | 19.1% | 19% | 33% | |
| Earnings per share growthHigher is better · 23 reported | 36.2% | 36.2% | 50% | 33% | |
| 3-year revenue growthHigher is better · 28 reported | 5.1% | 10.0% | 33% | 33% |
Ranking by growth score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around AMAT| Rank | Company | Market cap | Growth | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 421.5B USD | 100 | 78 | |
| 2 | 164.9B USD | 98 | 89 | |
| 3 | 25.82T JPY (≈$175.6B) | 96 | 73 | |
| 4 | 207.6B USD | 95 | 61 | |
| 4 | 259.7B USD | 95 | 63 | |
| 17 | 235.6B USD | 69 | 52 | |
| 18 | 181.7B EUR (≈$199.8B) | 60 | 56 | |
| 18 | 203.8B USD | 60 | 56 | |
| 20 | 286.5B USD | 58 | 39 | |
| 21 | 303.1B USD | 57 | 58 | |
| 21 | 406.0B USD | 57 | 54 | |
| 23 | 285.4B USD | 55 | 63 | |
| 24 | 155.8B USD | 46 | 63 | |
| 25 | 5.87T TWD (≈$182.0B) | 44 | 46 |
Scores are sector-relative percentiles from the latest snapshot, always calculated against the whole sector: narrowing the comparison group changes who you compare with, not the scores. Missing metrics are left out and the remaining weights rescaled. How we score