Home Compare BMW.DE vs RACE.MI
Stock Comparison · Industry comparison · Auto Manufacturers

Bayerische Motoren Werke Aktiengesellschaft vs Ferrari N.V.: Which Stock Looks Stronger in 2026?

Bayerische Motoren Werke Aktiengesellschaft holds the cleaner structural position, with the lead spread across valuation and growth. Ferrari still has the edge on profitability, 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. Both peer scores are relative to the STOXX 600 universe, making them directly comparable.

Updated 2026-07-05

The clearest separation starts in valuation, but growth adds another real layer to the result. The overall score gap is 14 points in favour of Bayerische Motoren Werke Aktiengesellschaft.

INDUSTRY COMPARISON

Both operate in: Auto Manufacturers

This comparison is based on industry proximity, not on functional trajectory similarity. BMW.DE and RACE.MI share the same industry classification.

For a similarity-based comparison, see how BMW.DE and Ferrari each position within their functional peer groups in AssetNext.

Peer-Relative Score
BMW.DE
Bayerische Motoren Werke Aktiengesellschaft
60
Peer-Score
Signal qualityMedium
Peer basis: STOXX 600
vs
RACE.MI
Ferrari N.V.
46
Peer-Score
Signal qualitylow
Peer basis: STOXX 600

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: BMW.DE vs RACE.MI Profitability 54 77 Stability 46 43 Valuation 87 37 Growth 45 15 BMW.DE RACE.MI
Gap Ranking
#1 Valuation +50
#2 Growth +30
#3 Profitability +23
#4 Stability +3
Price Setup

Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.

Price setup map for BMW.DE and RACE.MI Stronger + cheaper Stronger + richer Weaker + cheaper Weaker + richer BMW.DERACE.MI Relative valuation Structural strength

The two profiles are relatively close, but the price setup still leans toward Bayerische Motoren Werke Aktiengesellschaft.

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

Entry today — historical context

Where BMW.DE and RACE.MI each sit in their own 5-year price and valuation history.

BASED ON 5-YEAR HISTORY BMW.DE Lower · near norm 0th 50th 100th 46 pct gap RACE.MI Neutral · below norm 0th 50th 100th 16th 62nd
Today BMW.DE sits in the lower portion of its own 5-year history (16th percentile), while RACE.MI sits higher in its own history (62nd). Within each stock's own 5-year context, BMW.DE is at a historically more favourable entry position than RACE.MI. This reflects entry timing, not which company is structurally stronger — peer-relative analysis is a separate question addressed above.

Describes historical entry positioning only. Descriptive — not investment advice.

Relative Position vs Comparable Companies
Valuation
On valuation, Bayerische Motoren Werke Aktiengesellschaft ranks near the top of the group; Ferrari N.V. sits in the weaker half.
Growth
Bayerische Motoren Werke Aktiengesellschaft sits higher in the group on growth, adding to the overall structural advantage.
Valuation — Dominant Gap
BMW.DE
87
RACE.MI
37
Gap+50in favour of BMW.DE

The multiple-based pricing edge comes from a forward P/E that is 25 turns lower.

What keeps the gap from being one-sided

Profitability still favours Ferrari, with a 22.9-point operating margin advantage keeping the comparison from looking fully resolved.

What this means for the comparison

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

Explore full peer positioning in AssetNext

Break down the BMW.DE vs RACE.MI comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.

Explore full breakdown →
Other comparisons with conflicting dimension signals

Explore how BMW.DE and RACE.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.

Because scores are peer-relative, the same company can have slightly different scores in different index universes. On comparison pages, both companies are shown within their shared peer universe wherever possible — so the scores are directly comparable. The peer basis is stated on each score card.

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.