Home Compare AMT vs INW.MI
Stock Comparison · Structural lead, mixed market

American Tower vs Infrastrutture Wireless Italiane S.p.A.: Which Stock Looks Stronger in 2026?

The structural profiles are close, with American Tower carrying a narrow edge on stability. Infrastrutture Wireless Italiane S.p.A still has the edge on growth, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. Both sides have seen trend damage — neither carries a clear market edge right now. With both trends damaged, the structural comparison carries most of the weight here.

The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.

Updated 2026-04-05

The clearest separation starts in stability, but profitability adds another real layer to the result.

Trajectory Similarity
0.76
Similar
Peer-set rank: #2
within American Tower Corporation's functional peer set

These two companies are linked by measured long-term financial trajectory similarity within the selected peer universe.

The pair sits on a clearly comparable long-term path, though it is not a near-twin match.

The match is driven mainly by revenue stability and capital structure.

Similarity drivers
revenue stabilitycapital structure
How to read the score
0.85–1.00 · Very similar0.70–0.84 · Similar0.55–0.69 · Moderately similarbelow 0.55 · Loose match
Peer-Relative Score
AMT
American Tower Corporation
57
Peer-Score
Signal qualityHigh
vs
INW.MI
Infrastrutture Wireless Italiane S.p.A.
52
Peer-Score
Signal qualityMedium

Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.

The largest gaps do not all point in the same direction.

Dimension spread: AMT vs INW.MI Profitability 62 45 Stability 62 41 Valuation 60 65 Growth 38 55 AMT INW.MI
Gap Ranking
#1 Stability +21
#2 Growth +17
#3 Profitability +17
#4 Valuation +5
Price Setup

Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.

Price setup map for AMT and INW.MI Stronger + cheaper Stronger + richer Weaker + cheaper Weaker + richer AMTINW.MI Relative valuation Structural strength

The structural gap is limited here, but current pricing still leans against American Tower Corporation.

Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.

Relative Position vs Comparable Companies
Stability
Both look solid on stability, though American Tower Corporation still holds the stronger peer position.
Growth
Infrastrutture Wireless Italiane S.p.A. sits in the stronger part of the group on growth, while American Tower Corporation is closer to mid-pack.
Stability — Dominant Gap
AMT
62
INW.MI
41
Gap+21in favour of AMT

The clearest distance comes from a steadier profile over time.

What keeps the gap from being one-sided

Earnings growth also leans the other way, which keeps the score lead from reading as a full growth sweep.

What this means for the comparison

The lead is built on both stability and growth — though growth still provides a counterweight.

Explore full peer positioning in AssetNext

Break down the AMT vs INW.MI comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.

Explore full breakdown →
Similar stability-and-growth comparisons

Explore how AMT and INW.MI each compare against other companies in their peer groups.

Rule-based, descriptive analysis only. Derived from peer percentile dimensions. Not investment advice. Peer groups are determined algorithmically based on structural similarity — not by sector classification alone.

How AssetNext Peer Scores Work

AssetNext scores reflect each company's structural position within its functional peer group — not a ranking against all stocks simultaneously. Peers are identified by similarity across eight financial dimensions, including revenue growth trajectory, margin structure, capital intensity, and earnings stability. A score of 75 means the company ranks in the top quartile within its own peer group, not the entire market.

Four dimension scores drive the overall peer score: Growth (revenue trajectory and expansion dynamics), Quality (margin structure and capital efficiency), Valuation (peer-relative pricing on standard multiples), and Stability (earnings consistency and financial predictability). Each dimension is scored 0–100 relative to the peer group, then combined into an overall peer score using equal weighting.

Scores are recalculated periodically as underlying financial data is updated. All analysis is descriptive and rule-based — AssetNext describes structural realities and never issues buy, sell or hold recommendations.