UBER Holdings, Inc. (UBER)vs CRM Holdings, Inc. (CRM)

Quick verdict

UBER Holdings, Inc. (UBER) and CRM Holdings, Inc. (CRM) appeal to different investors. On our six-factor framework, UBER scores 2.5 and CRM scores 3.5. neither clearly looks cheaper on the multiples that matter, while UBER grows faster and CRM earns higher returns on capital. Overall, CRM edges this comparison, but the right pick depends on whether you prioritise value, growth, income or balance-sheet safety.

2-year relative performance

At-a-glance comparison

Business model and revenue mix

UBER Holdings, Inc. operates in Oil & Gas Integrated (Energy), while CRM Holdings, Inc. sits in Oil & Gas Integrated (Energy). Because both compete in the same sector, this is a direct head-to-head and the financial differences below are especially meaningful. UBER carries a beta of 1.53 versus 1.51 for CRM, meaning UBER has historically been the more volatile of the two.

Valuation

On valuation, neither clearly is the cheaper stock. UBER trades on a forward P/E of n/a and EV/EBITDA of 20.91, against 36.07 and 6.35 for CRM. Price-to-sales is 9.39 vs 4.31, and free-cash-flow yield is 6.7% vs 3.0%. A higher multiple is only justified if the company can sustain faster growth or wider margins, which is exactly what the next sections test.

Growth profile

UBER is the faster grower. UBER has compounded revenue at 19.6% over three years with EPS growth of 12.9%, while CRM has delivered 15.0% revenue and 13.0% EPS growth. Growth like this is the single biggest driver of long-term returns, but it also tends to come with a richer valuation, so it must be weighed against the multiples above.

Profitability and quality

On profitability and quality, CRM is stronger. UBER posts a -8.0% operating margin, 1.9% return on equity and -6.0% return on invested capital. CRM posts 28.4%, 36.4% and 29.9% respectively. Return on invested capital above roughly 15% is a hallmark of a durable competitive advantage, so this metric deserves particular attention.

Balance-sheet risk

CRM has the safer balance sheet. UBER carries net-debt/EBITDA of 2.07x with a current ratio of 3.09, versus -1.37x and 1.70 for CRM. Lower leverage gives a company more room to invest through a downturn and reduces the risk of dilution or distress.

Price performance and shareholder returns

Over the past year UBER returned 76.6% against 85.7% for CRM; on a three-year annualised basis it is 24.9% vs 23.9%. UBER yields 0.4% and CRM yields 0.0%. Past performance never guarantees future results, but the multi-year track record shows how the market has rewarded each business so far.

Which stock fits which investor

For value-oriented investors, UBER is the better fit on today's multiples. Growth investors will likely prefer UBER, which is expanding faster. Income investors should lean toward UBER for its higher shareholder yield, while investors who prize quality-at-a-reasonable-price will favour CRM for its superior returns on capital. This is a comparison of facts, not a recommendation — your time horizon, risk tolerance and existing holdings should drive the final decision.

• Value: UBER
• Growth: UBER
• Income: UBER
• Quality: CRM

Frequently asked questions

Is UBER or CRM the better buy right now?

Neither is universally "better." UBER scores 2.5 and CRM scores 3.5 on our six-factor framework. neither clearly is cheaper, UBER grows faster, and CRM is higher quality — so the right pick depends on your objective.

Which stock is cheaper, UBER or CRM?

neither clearly is the cheaper stock across forward P/E (n/a vs 36.07), EV/EBITDA (20.91 vs 6.35) and price-to-sales (9.39 vs 4.31).

Which has grown faster, UBER or CRM?

UBER has the stronger growth profile, with three-year revenue CAGR of 19.6% for UBER versus 15.0% for CRM.

Which stock pays a bigger dividend?

UBER yields 0.4% and CRM yields 0.0%, so UBER is the stronger income choice.

Related comparisons

• AAPL vs CRM
• AAPL vs UBER
• AMD vs CRM
• AMD vs UBER
• AVGO vs CRM
• AVGO vs UBER