Vodafone Public Company leads structurally, with growth as the clearest single gap between the two profiles. Telefónica, still has the edge on stability, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. On the market side, Vodafone Public Company is in better shape — its trend is intact while Telefónica,'s trend has broken down. That puts structure and market broadly in agreement — Vodafone Public Company's lead looks more confirmed than conflicted.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.
Most of the separation is still concentrated in growth.
Both operate in: Telecom Services
This comparison is based on industry proximity, not on functional trajectory similarity. TEF.MC and VOD.L share the same industry classification.
For a similarity-based comparison, see how Telefónica, and Vodafone Public Company each position within their functional peer groups in AssetNext.
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 price setup looks more supportive for Vodafone Group Public Limited Company, but Telefónica, S.A. still has the stronger structure.
Valuation position uses Forward P/E where available.
One company is still expanding while the other is contracting, which creates a very wide growth split.
Market confirmation also leans toward Vodafone Group Public Limited Company, which makes the lead look better backed by actual market behaviour.
Growth gives Vodafone Group Public Limited Company the clearer edge, even though stability and the price setup keep the overall picture from looking clean.
Break down the TEF.MC vs VOD.L comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how TEF.MC and VOD.L 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.
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.