The structural profiles are close, with Analog Devices carrying a narrow edge on stability. Adyen still leads on profitability and valuation, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. On the market side, Analog Devices is in better shape — its trend is intact while Adyen's trend has broken down. That puts structure and market broadly in agreement — Analog Devices's lead looks more confirmed than conflicted.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.
Most of the separation is still concentrated in stability.
This comparison is anchored in long-term financial trajectory similarity within the selected peer universe.
The pair still fits the compare framework, though the long-term structural overlap is relatively light.
The strongest overlap appears in recent revenue growth and capital structure.
Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.
The clearest separation appears in stability.
Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.
The setup splits cleanly: structure favours Analog Devices, Inc., while the price setup favours Adyen N.V..
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
The clearest distance comes from a steadier profile over time.
Profitability still favours Adyen, with a 16.5-point operating margin advantage keeping the comparison from looking fully resolved.
Stability is the clearest driver of the lead, with profitability adding further support — though profitability still provides a real counterweight.
Break down the ADI vs ADYEN.AS comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how ADI and ADYEN.AS 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.
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.