NXP Semiconductors holds the cleaner structural position, with growth as the main driver and profitability adding further support. Temenos still leads on profitability and valuation, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. The market setup is currently leaning toward Temenos, which does not confirm the structural lead. That leaves a split case: the structural lead stays with NXP Semiconductors, but the market is not currently confirming it.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels. Peer scores are normalised within each company's primary universe (NXPI: Nasdaq 100, TEMN.SW: STOXX 600).
The comparison is mainly decided in growth, with the rest of the profile carrying less weight.
These two companies are linked by measured long-term financial trajectory similarity within the selected peer universe.
The pair shares a valid long-term profile match, but the trajectories are not especially close.
The clearest structural overlap shows up in capital structure and revenue stability.
Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.
The clearest separation appears in growth.
Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.
The setup splits cleanly: structure favours NXP Semiconductors N.V., while the price setup favours Temenos AG.
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
Where NXPI and TEMN.SW each sit in their own 5-year price and valuation history.
Describes historical entry positioning only. Descriptive — not investment advice.
One company is still expanding while the other is contracting, which creates a very wide growth split.
Capital efficiency also runs the other way, with a 16.1-point ROIC edge acting as a real counterforce.
The growth edge is decisive, even though current pricing and profitability still lean somewhat toward Temenos AG.
Break down the NXPI vs TEMN.SW comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how NXPI and TEMN.SW 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.
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.