Home Compare OMC vs TTWO
Stock Comparison · Comparison

Omnicom Group vs Take-Two Interactive Software: Which Stock Looks Stronger in 2026?

Omnicom holds the cleaner structural position, with the lead spread across profitability and valuation. Take-Two Interactive Software still has the edge on stability, 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.

Updated 2026-04-05

The clearest score difference appears in profitability. Omnicom Group Inc. leads by 10 points on the overall comparison score.

Trajectory Similarity
0.56
Moderately similar
Peer-set rank: #10
within Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc.'s functional peer set

This pair is matched through 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 growth trajectory.

Similarity drivers
capital structurerevenue growth trajectory
What reduces the match
revenue stability
How to read the score
0.85–1.00 · Very similar0.70–0.84 · Similar0.55–0.69 · Moderately similarbelow 0.55 · Loose match
Peer-Relative Score
OMC
Omnicom Group Inc.
63
Peer-Score
Signal qualityMedium
vs
TTWO
Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc.
53
Peer-Score
Signal qualityMedium

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

Score differences across key dimensions.

Dimension spread: OMC vs TTWO Profitability 24 0 Stability 49 61 Valuation 87 75 Growth 100 90 OMC TTWO
Gap Ranking
#1 Profitability +24
#2 Valuation +12
#3 Stability +12
#4 Growth +10
Price Setup

Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.

Price setup map for OMC and TTWO Stronger + cheaper Stronger + richer Weaker + cheaper Weaker + richer OMCTTWO Relative valuation Structural strength

The two profiles are relatively close, but the price setup still leans toward Omnicom Group Inc..

Valuation position uses Forward P/E where available.

Relative Position vs Comparable Companies
Profitability
Neither side looks especially strong on profitability, though Omnicom Group Inc. still ranks somewhat higher.
Valuation
Both look solid on valuation, though Omnicom Group Inc. still holds the stronger peer position.
Profitability — Dominant Gap
OMC
24
TTWO
0
Gap+24in favour of OMC

The profitability lead is mainly driven by a 16.9-point operating margin advantage.

What keeps the gap from being one-sided

Stability still leans toward Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc., so the lead is real without reading as one-way.

What this means for the comparison

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

Explore full peer positioning in AssetNext

Break down the OMC vs TTWO comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.

Explore full breakdown →
Similar profitability-and-valuation comparisons

Explore how OMC and TTWO 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.