Which AI Stock, NVIDIA or Broadcom, Is the Better Bargain to Buy?
Advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) have made NVIDIA Corporation NVDA a Wall Street darling for some time. On the other hand, Broadcom Inc.'s AVGO recent share repurchase plan, along with its planned moves to capitalize on the growing AI field, has delighted income-oriented investors.
However, the latest trade war between the United States and several other countries has caused market turmoil, with shares of NVIDIA and Broadcom declining 19.9% and 25.7% year to date. This presents an opportunity to buy these quality stocks at a discounted price for long-term gains. But which stock is the better bargain? Let's explore –
Image Source: Zacks Investment Research
NVIDIA leads the growing graphics processing unit (GPU) market with over 80% share, giving the Jensen Huang-led company a competitive edge over its peers. More than Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.'s AMD ROCm software platform, NVIDIA's CUDA software platform is in demand among developers.
At the same time, there is an insane demand for NVIDIA's new Blackwell chips among notable tech firms due to their energy efficiency and faster AI interfaces. The older Hopper chips also maintain steady demand due to their higher quality compared to rival Intel Corporation's INTC chips (read more: Can Intel Be the Turnaround Stock of 2025? Is the Time to Buy Now?).
NVIDIA, meanwhile, is well-poised to make the most of the increase in AI data center spending. Top cloud computing stocks are fulfilling the increase in demand for AI workloads by acquiring GPUs and are spending $250 billion on AI data center infrastructure. One of NVIDIA's prominent customers, Microsoft Corporation MSFT, may have reduced data center spending, but Alphabet Inc. GOOGL and Amazon.com, Inc. AMZN are now supporting NVIDIA in this aspect.
Broadcom expects the demand for its custom AI accelerator to increase in the near future and the market size for its execution processing units (XPUs) to touch $60-90 billion by fiscal 2027, way higher than last year's $12.2 billion.
Broadcom's XPUs can work on a particular workload and even outdo NVIDIA's GPUs. Moreover, they have the competence to perform tasks more affordably than GPUs. Thus, banking on the rise in demand for accelerator chips, Broadcom is now developing a 2-nanometer AI XPU, which is unique. The company's application-specific integrated chips (ASICs), known to support AI and machine learning, are witnessing strong demand as well.
No doubt, with GPUs and XPUs gaining popularity in the coming years, and AI infrastructure spending increasing, the future does look bright for both NVIDIA and Broadcom. However, from a long-term perspective, NVIDIA is a better choice than Broadcom.
This is because NVIDIA has been able to generate profits more proficiently than Broadcom, with its net profit margin coming in at 55.9%, more than AVGO's 18.5%.
Image Source: Zacks Investment Research
NVIDIA has also been able to control its expenditures and generate profits in a much better way than Broadcom since its return on equity (ROE) of 117.6% outshined AVGO's 38.5%.
Image Source: Zacks Investment Research
But from a short-term viewpoint, Broadcom has an upper hand over NVIDIA. After all, Broadcom is a solid dividend payer, which is indicative of a better-quality business that can keep the company immune to the current market vagaries.
Broadcom has increased its dividends 6 times over the past five years, and its payout ratio sits at a healthy 52% of earnings. Broadcom also has sufficient cash balance to pay off its dividends. Check Broadcom's dividend history here.
On the contrary, NVIDIA's payout ratio sits at a paltry 1% of earnings and the company increased dividends only once in the past five years. Check NVIDIA's dividend history here.
NVIDIA presently has a Zacks Rank #2 (Buy), whereas Broadcom carries a Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy). You can see the complete list of today's Zacks Rank #1 stocks here.
Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report
Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) : Free Stock Analysis Report
Intel Corporation (INTC) : Free Stock Analysis Report
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (AMD) : Free Stock Analysis Report
Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) : Free Stock Analysis Report
NVIDIA Corporation (NVDA) : Free Stock Analysis Report
Broadcom Inc. (AVGO) : Free Stock Analysis Report
Alphabet Inc. (GOOGL) : Free Stock Analysis Report
This article originally published on Zacks Investment Research (zacks.com).
Zacks Investment Research
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Why Broadcom Inc. (AVGO) Crashed On Friday
We recently published a list of . In this article, we are going to take a look at where Broadcom Inc. (NASDAQ:AVGO) stands against other Friday's worst-performing stocks. Broadcom dropped its share prices for a second day on Friday, shedding 5 percent to finish at $246.93 apiece as investors appeared to have already priced in its impressive earnings performance for the second quarter of fiscal year 2025. In a statement, Broadcom Inc. (NASDAQ:AVGO) said it netted $4.965 billion during the period, higher by 134 percent than the $2.121 billion in the same period last year. Revenues also increased by 20 percent to $15 billion from $12.487 billion. A technician working at a magnified microscope, developing a new integrated circuit. 'Broadcom achieved record second quarter revenue on continued momentum in AI semiconductor solutions and VMware. [Second quarter] AI revenue grew 46 percent year-over-year to over $4.4 billion, driven by robust demand for AI networking,' Broadcom Inc. (NASDAQ:AVGO) President and CEO Hock Tan. 'We expect growth in AI semiconductor revenue to accelerate to $5.1 billion in Q3, delivering ten consecutive quarters of growth, as our hyperscale partners continue to invest,' he added. Broadcom Inc. (NASDAQ:AVGO) also declared a cash dividend of $0.59 per share to stockholders as of June 20 record, payable on June 30. Overall, AVGO ranks 6th on our list of Friday's worst-performing stocks. While we acknowledge the potential of AVGO as an investment, our conviction lies in the belief that some AI stocks hold greater promise for delivering higher returns and have limited downside risk. If you are looking for an extremely cheap AI stock that is also a major beneficiary of Trump tariffs and onshoring, see our free report on the best short-term AI stock. READ NEXT: 20 Best AI Stocks To Buy Now and 30 Best Stocks to Buy Now According to Billionaires. Disclosure: None. This article is originally published at Insider Monkey.
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Could Trump fail on tax bill? Why going 'big' doesn't always work out as planned
Disputes inside the GOP about parts of Trump's major tax bill threaten approval in the Senate and past compromises reached by the Republican-led House. Show Caption Republicans begin debate in the narrowly divided Senate with factions seeking to increase spending cuts or curbing tax breaks, which threaten the compromise needed for approval back in the House. Trump's billionaire adviser Elon Musk complicated the debate by urging lawmakers to kill the bill. Congressional leaders insist approval is still possible despite the fissures in the narrow Republican majorities in each chamber and the unified opposition of Democrats. WASHINGTON – Will President Donald Trump 's 'big beautiful bill' go bust? The second-term president's highest-priority legislation is under attack from some Senate Republicans – and from his former billionaire adviser Elon Musk – for costing too much. Complaints are also mounting from Republicans who are opposed to cutting Medicaid health insurance and other popular programs used by many Americans, especially as a way to help pay for tax breaks that would benefit some of the country's highest-income earners. With Republicans holding the slimmest of majorities in both chambers of Congress and with Democrats showing no sign of wanting to help Trump notch a major win to begin his new administration, lawmakers from Trump's own party are sounding apprehensive about threading the needle before their self-imposed July 4 deadline to get something to the president's desk for signature into law. 'We're anxious to get to work on it," Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-South Dakota, told reporters earlier in the week as Republicans and Musk started publicly airing their complaints about the effort. Adding to the challenge: Some of the very House GOP members who last month voted in favor of their 1,100-page version of Trump's tax and policy plan started finding faults of their own that they say meant they'd probably have been a 'no' if they had the chance to do it again. Presidents often aim high to start terms Presidents often try in their first year to build on the momentum of their elections to get major legislation approved. For Joe Biden, it was an infrastructure bill. For Barack Obama, it was overhauling healthcare insurance. For George W. Bush, it was overhauling public education. Trump leapt into action in 2025 with an unprecedented pace of executive orders: 157 through May 23. When he turned to legislation, he persuaded Republican congressional leaders to package all his priorities into one bill, rather than splitting taxes and border security into two different bills, to complete the debate in one fell swoop. Lawmakers often shy away from piling too much into one bill because each contentious provision spurs its own opposition. But faced with the prospect of unanimous Democratic opposition, Trump opted for a strategy that focuses on GOP priorities such as tax relief and border security while personally lobbying reluctant Republicans to stay in line. 'Americans have given us a mandate for bold and profound change,' Trump told Congress in a speech March 4. 'I call on all of my Republican friends in the Senate and House to work as fast as they can to get this Bill to MY DESK before the Fourth of JULY,' he added in a social media post about three months later, on June 2. Musk opposition makes waves Trump's efforts worked in the Republican-led House, which after several days of negotiations and an all-night floor debate voted 215-214 in favor of a plan that had the full backing of the White House. Getting the measure through the Senate - even with the GOP in charge needing just a simple majority of 51 votes - is proving to be its own elusive challenge. Musk, the former head of Trump's bureaucracy-slashing Department of Government Efficiency, spent this past week unloading on the House-passed bill for spending too much money. He called the legislation "pork-filled" and a "disgusting abomination," and urged lawmakers to "KILL the BILL." While Musk's barrage ignited a war with Trump and left many Republicans cringing, deficit hawks in the GOP said they appreciated the world's richest man also pushing for deeper spending cuts from the U.S. government. "I welcome people like Elon Musk that try to hold our feet to the fire," said Rep. Eric Burlison, R-Missouri. "We often disappoint our voters when we don't do the cuts that we campaign on, when we're not fiscally responsible." But Rep. Don Bacon, R-Nebraska, who served in the Air Force for 30 years, said the division between Trump and Musk wasn't a good look for his party, especially when it's trying to advance the primary piece of legislation on the president's agenda. "It's just not helpful," Bacon said. "When you have division, divided teams don't perform as well." 'The opposite of conservative': Sen. Paul on bill Several pockets of Republican senators have voiced concerns about the House-passed legislation. Each group has their issue that they want addressed, and each one presents a hurdle for Trump and GOP leaders like Thune as they try to cobble together a winning 51-vote coalition that can also make it back through the House for another final vote. The Senate factions include one group seeking to cut more spending because the Congressional Budget Office said the House-passed plan would add $2.4 trillion to the debt over the next 10 years. Others are worried about cutting Medicaid, the federal health insurance program for low-income families. And another handful of senators say they are worried about the House-passed bill rolling back renewable energy tax credits for solar, wind, geothermal and nuclear energy. "There are many of us who recognize that what came out of the House was pretty aggressive in how it seeks to wind down or phase out many of the energy tax credit provisions," said Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska. "I happen to think that we've got tax policies that are working to help advance our energy initiatives around the country, as diverse and as varied as they are. Wouldn't we want to continue those investments? 'This bill is the opposite of conservative, and we should not pass it,' added Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, in a June 4 social media post that raised concerns about the nation's debt limit. Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley is one of the outspoken Republicans taking issue with the House-passed bill's provisions that would cut nearly $800 billion during the next decade from Medicaid and, according to the Congressional Budget Office, cost 7.8 million people their health insurance. "I don't want to see rural hospitals close and I don't want to see any benefits cut in my state," Hawley said. Trump and his allies contend spending cuts of $1.6 trillion are the most ever approved in a House bill and that the tax cuts will spur economic growth to offset the costs. Trump got personal this week in calling Paul's ideas 'crazy' in a social media post and said the people of Kentucky 'can't stand him.' House Speaker Mike Johnson, a staunch Trump ally, told reporters June 4 that few people are going to like everything in an 1,100-page bill. But the Louisiana Republican said the measure he helped craft in the House was carefully calibrated to gain wide support. "I hope everybody will evaluate that – in both parties, and everybody – and recognize, 'Wow, the benefits of this far outweigh anything that I don't like out it,'" Johnson said. Senate dropping local tax deductions would be 'radioactive': Rep. Lalota Any changes made by the Senate will force another vote in the House before the bill can become law - and that's where the math can get tricky. Republican senators are talking about tinkering with a key compromise that Trump and Johnson signed off on in the House that raised the federal deduction for state and local taxes (SALT) from $10,000 to $40,000 for people earning less than $500,000 per year. That provision is important to GOP lawmakers from high-tax states such as California, New York and New Jersey who supported the House bill that passed through the 435-seat chamber by only a one-vote margin. The Senate aims to cut back that provision. But Rep. Nick Lalota, R-New York, told reporters on June 4 that revisiting the tax issue "would be like digging up safely-buried radioactive waste." House members scouring through the bill they voted on weeks ago are also finding unfamiliar provisions in the version that they say they would have opposed. For example, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Georgia, said in a social media post June 3 that the Senate needs to strip out language she hadn't noticed earlier that would prevent states from regulating artificial intelligence. Rep. Mike Flood, R-Nebraska, said he opposed a section that aims to hinder federal judges from enforcing their court orders. Trump sought the provision to prevent judges from blocking policies largely spelled out via his executive orders. Senate could drop contentious provisions House members risked supporting Even though Republicans control both chambers of Congress, the Senate could drop or fail to approve contentious parts that GOP House colleagues in competitive districts already went out on a limb to support. It's happened many times before - with sizable political consequences. The concept even has a name: Getting BTU'd. That refers to a 1993 House vote on a controversial energy tax during the first year of Bill Clinton's presidency based on British thermal units. House Democrats lost 54 seats in the 1994 election – and control of the chamber for the first time in 40 years – in part because of supporting the BTU tax that the Senate never debated. John Pitney, a political science professor at Claremont McKenna College, has said a book about such votes could be called 'Profiles in Futility.' Another example was the 2009 American Clean Energy and Security Act, a bill which Obama supported as president that aimed to limit the emissions of heat-trapping gases from power plants, vehicles and other industrial sources. The Democrat-controlled House narrowly approved the measure 219-212 but the Senate never took it up. Critics said it would raise the cost of energy. The Competitive Enterprise Institute, a non-profit libertarian think tank that opposed the measure, counted 28 House Democrats from coal states who lost their seats in the 2010 mid-term election after voting for the bill. Fast forward to 2025 and Republicans are the ones facing a similar dynamic. Musk, who contributed about $290 million of his personal fortune to help Republicans including Trump win last November, slammed House lawmakers who voted for the president's legislative package.'Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong,' Musk wrote June 3 on social media. But House Republicans who voted for the legislation, including some who also demanded deeper spending cuts when it was in their hands, said they're not worried about the package falling apart and coming back to haunt them. They say that's because they did fight for more budget cuts. "This wasn't a hard vote. It was hard going through the process to get more, and you can always do better," said Rep. Ralph Norman, R-South Carolina. "But look at what Donald Trump 's done, the great things that are contributing to cutting the deficit." Rep. David Schweikert, R-Arizona, who represents a competitive toss-up district, noted that he's introduced multiple bills to trim federal spending. "If Mr. Musk wants to be helpful, what he should do is start to understand that those of us in a 50-50 district who have shown up with actual policy solutions that offset every penny of this bill," he said. Leaving Washington for the weekend, Trump told reporters aboard Air Force Once on June 6 that he wasn't worried about Musk and that he remained confident he'd get "tremendous support" in the Senate to pass the bill. 'I don't know of anybody who's going to vote against it," the president said, before adding: "Maybe Rand Paul." For his part, Johnson told reporters June 4 that he wasn't concerned about House Republicans losing seats in 2026. Predicting that the Senate would find the necessary votes on the president's tax bill, the speaker said he expects Americans will see the benefits of Trump's efforts before the next election. 'Am I concerned about the effect of this on the midterms? I'm not," Johnson said. "I have no concern whatsoever. I am absolutely convinced that we are going to win the midterms and grow the House majority because we are delivering for the American majority and fulfilling our campaign promises."
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Why Costco Stock (COST) May Be a Smarter Investment Than Big Tech
Costco (COST) has long been a market favorite, but its current valuation has even the most bullish investors raising eyebrows as the company trades near all-time highs. Trading at earnings multiples that outpace some of the world's biggest tech giants, it's fair to ask: how can a warehouse selling pallets of toilet paper and rotisserie chickens possibly justify such a steep premium? At first glance, the numbers don't add up. Comparing Costco to tech companies indicates a rather inflated valuation for the wholesaler. Easily unpack a company's performance with TipRanks' new KPI Data for smart investment decisions Receive undervalued, market resilient stocks right to your inbox with TipRanks' Smart Value Newsletter Timid growth projections, razor-thin margins, and a business model that hasn't changed much in decades don't exactly scream innovation. And yet, Costco continues to climb—largely, in my view, due to one key factor: risk perception. Because the company's business model is so heavily anchored in predictable, recurring revenue from membership fees, its earnings stream is exceptionally stable. That stability arguably justifies the stock's lofty valuation—and forms the backbone of my bullish thesis, even if there's little to no margin of safety. I agree with Costco's critics—those who are skeptical about a warehouse full of assorted goods trading at a forward P/E of 58, a multiple literally higher than tech giant and AI trailblazer Nvidia. For a company like Costco, which has grown revenue at a ~10% CAGR over the past five years and operating income by 15%—yet is only expected by analysts to grow revenue at a 5% CAGR over the next five—it really doesn't make much sense, at first glance, for the business to trade at such a steep premium. But here's what a lot of market participants miss when analyzing companies: valuations based on net earnings are heavily anchored to one key factor—risk. And unlike earnings, there's no single, universally accepted measure of risk. Some investors focus on beta, while others consider regulatory threats or macroeconomic exposure. Ultimately, each investor views the situation through their own lens. That's where Costco stands out as a rare case: a recurring revenue model outside of the tech sector. Customers pay an annual membership fee—ranging from $60 to $120 in the U.S.—just to shop in its warehouses. Costco likely converts nearly all of that directly into operating profit (though the company doesn't explicitly disclose this), which allows the business to be highly profitable even while selling goods at razor-thin margins. In the most recent quarter, membership income rose 10% year-over-year, with a staggering 93% renewal rate in North America. That kind of brand loyalty and perceived value creates a business model with very little risk of earnings volatility. And because of that, Costco functions like a defensive stock, offering low risk and a high degree of predictability in returns. So, while the valuation may look stretched on the surface, this level of stability and cash flow certainty arguably justifies a premium multiple. While only about 2% of Costco's total revenue comes from membership fees, those fees account for more than half of the company's total operating income. At this kind of scale, there's simply no other retailer that can pull off a high-volume, low-margin model quite like the Issaquah, Washington-based warehouse giant. Main Street Data indicates that Costco's revenues are inching higher while membership fees remain a staple. That's why, even during periods of weak consumer spending, Costco tends to remain highly profitable—not just because of its membership model, but because it consistently gains market share from competitors. By keeping margins razor-thin on discretionary items, and with shoppers naturally shifting toward essentials during times of financial stress, Costco puts pressure on rival retailers that simply can't match its pricing without cutting into their own profitability. Take Q3, for example: Costco's comparable sales rose 8% year-over-year to $62 billion, while peers like Target (TGT) saw comparable sales shrink and were forced to revise earnings guidance downward. This highlights how Costco isn't just weathering macroeconomic headwinds—it's actually growing through them. In other words, macro risks seem to have a much lighter impact on a company like Costco. While Costco's relatively low-risk business model may warrant a valuation premium, it's worth exploring what an appropriate stock price might look like under simplified assumptions. For this analysis, I'll estimate an equity value for Costco using a basic perpetuity-based discounted cash flow (DCF) model. Let's begin with the fact that, in fiscal year 2024, Costco generated approximately $4.8 billion in membership fee revenue. While this isn't equivalent to free cash flow, it serves as a reasonable proxy for recurring operating cash flow due to its stable and high-margin nature. With Costco's current market capitalization at approximately $470 billion, we can reverse-engineer the valuation. If we assume a 6% discount rate—reflecting the company's relatively low risk profile despite the 10-year Treasury yield sitting around 4.4%—and a perpetual growth rate of 5%, the implied equity value is approximately $480 billion, or about $1,083 per share. This closely aligns with Costco's current share price. These assumptions appear fairly reasonable and suggest that Costco's valuation is justified under optimistic, yet not unrealistic, conditions. However, using a more conservative 7% discount rate, while keeping other assumptions constant, would cut the implied equity value significantly, roughly in half. In summary, while Costco does not appear overvalued under favorable scenarios, the current valuation leaves little room for error. A meaningful margin of safety may only emerge if macroeconomic conditions shift, such as a recession prompting lower risk-free rates and, in turn, greater tolerance for elevated valuation multiples. Out of the 25 analysts who have covered COST in the past three months, 17 rate the stock as a Buy, while the remaining eight call it a Hold. So, while the overall sentiment is moderately bullish, the average price target of $1,096.36 implies ~8.5% upside from the current share price over the next twelve months. Given the strength and stability of Costco's underlying business model, its premium valuation multiples appear justifiable. At present, there are no significant concerns that would challenge a constructive outlook on the stock. However, it's important to note that the current valuation offers limited—if any—margin of safety. As such, I maintain a cautious Buy rating on Costco. While near-term upside may be constrained, the company remains well-positioned to deliver steady, long-term compound growth. Disclaimer & DisclosureReport an Issue
