Meta Platforms, Inc.'s functional peer companies ranked by peer score — growth, valuation, profitability and stability compared.
| Comparison | META peer score | |
|---|---|---|
|
Meta Platforms, Inc. vs Alphabet Inc.
|
75 | Compare → |
|
Meta Platforms, Inc. vs T-Mobile US, Inc.
|
65 | Compare → |
|
Meta Platforms, Inc. vs Antofagasta plc
|
64 | Compare → |
|
Meta Platforms, Inc. vs Eli Lilly and Company
|
68 | Compare → |
|
Meta Platforms, Inc. vs Microsoft Corporation
|
75 | Compare → |
|
Meta Platforms, Inc. vs Amadeus IT Group, S.A.
|
55 | Compare → |
|
Meta Platforms, Inc. vs First Solar, Inc.
|
61 | Compare → |
|
Meta Platforms, Inc. vs Ferrari N.V.
|
57 | Compare → |
|
Meta Platforms, Inc. vs Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd.
|
63 | Compare → |
|
Meta Platforms, Inc. vs Viking Holdings Ltd
|
70 | Compare → |
|
Meta Platforms, Inc. vs Novo Nordisk A/S
|
58 | Compare → |
View the complete Meta Platforms, Inc. report including all peer dimensions.
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.