Home Compare CBOE vs CME
Stock Comparison · Industry comparison · Financial Data & Stock Exchang

Cboe Global Markets vs CME Group: Which Stock Looks Stronger in 2026?

The structural profiles are close, with Cboe Global Markets carrying a narrow edge on growth. The remaining gap is narrow enough that the comparison remains open to different readings. The market setup is mixed, without a decisive signal in either direction. The market is not adding a decisive signal either way — the structural read carries the weight.

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

Updated 2026-04-05

The comparison is mainly decided in growth, with the rest of the profile carrying less weight.

INDUSTRY COMPARISON

Both operate in: Financial Data & Stock Exchanges

This comparison is based on industry proximity, not on functional trajectory similarity. CBOE and CME share the same industry classification.

For a similarity-based comparison, see how Cboe Global Markets and CME each position within their functional peer groups in AssetNext.

Peer-Relative Score
CBOE
Cboe Global Markets, Inc.
72
Peer-Score
Signal qualityHigh
vs
CME
CME Group Inc.
67
Peer-Score
Signal qualityHigh

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

The clearest separation appears in growth.

Dimension spread: CBOE vs CME Profitability 60 65 Stability 97 90 Valuation 68 74 Growth 69 38 CBOE CME
Gap Ranking
#1 Growth +31
#2 Stability +7
#3 Valuation +6
#4 Profitability +5
Price Setup

Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.

Price setup map for CBOE and CME Stronger + cheaper Stronger + richer Weaker + cheaper Weaker + richer CBOECME Relative valuation Structural strength

The setup is mixed: neither company clearly combines the stronger profile with the more supportive price setup.

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

Relative Position vs Comparable Companies
Growth
Cboe Global Markets, Inc. ranks near the top of the group on growth; CME Group Inc. sits in the weaker half.
Growth — Dominant Gap
CBOE
69
CME
38
Gap+31in favour of CBOE

Earnings growth is one contributing factor within the growth lead.

What keeps the gap from being one-sided

CME Group Inc. still shows lower market-fundamental divergence, which keeps the wider picture mixed rather than completely one-sided.

What this means for the comparison

The main read on growth is clearer than the broader score gap.

Explore full peer positioning in AssetNext

Break down the CBOE vs CME comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.

Explore full breakdown →
Similar growth-driven comparisons

Explore how CBOE and CME 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.