Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) vs Micron Technology, Inc. (MU)

MU leads on 9 of 16 compared metrics.

A side-by-side comparison of Costco Wholesale Corporation and Micron Technology, Inc. across valuation, profitability, dividends, and growth — built entirely from reported fundamentals, as of June 14, 2026. The ● marks the stronger figure on each row (cheaper multiple, higher margin/return).

Total return — COST vs MU

growth of $100 · last 30y
COST +9597.4%MU +6496.8%COST compounded faster
02k4k6k8k10kStart $100200120062011201620212026$9,697$6,597
COST MU

COST vs MU: by the numbers

  • MU is the larger company ($1.11T vs $435.65B market cap).
  • MU trades at the lower earnings multiple (46.32 vs 49.41 P/E).
  • MU converts more revenue to profit (41.49% vs 3.01% net margin).
  • MU grew revenue faster over the past five years (20.34% vs 9.48% CAGR).
  • COST pays the higher dividend yield (0.55% vs 0.05%).

Which is better, COST or MU?

Metric tally: COST 7 · MU 9

It depends on what you're optimizing for:

ValueMU(lower P/E)
GrowthMU(faster 5Y revenue CAGR)
IncomeCOST(higher dividend yield)
QualityCOST(higher ROIC)

Valuation

MetricCOSTMU
P/E ratio49.4146.32
Forward P/E43.40
P/S ratio1.4919.25
P/B ratio13.0315.44
PEG ratio5.230.02
EV / EBITDA29.4330.08
FCF yield2.02%0.92%

Profitability

MetricCOSTMU
Gross margin12.88%58.44%
Operating margin3.82%48.52%
Net margin3.01%41.49%
ROE26.38%33.28%
ROIC19.44%12.12%

Dividends

MetricCOSTMU
Dividend yield0.55%0.05%
Payout ratio29.44%6.47%

Growth (annualized)

MetricCOSTMU
Revenue CAGR (5Y)9.48%20.34%
EPS CAGR (5Y)15.04%5.12%
FCF CAGR (5Y)4.95%140.90%
Total return CAGR (5Y)21.56%66.18%

Frequently asked

Which is better, COST or MU?
It depends on your goal. value: MU (lower P/E); growth: MU (faster 5Y revenue CAGR); income: COST (higher dividend yield); quality: COST (higher ROIC). Across all compared metrics, MU leads 9 to 7.
Is COST or MU cheaper?
On trailing earnings, MU is cheaper: COST trades at a 49.41 P/E and MU at 46.32.
Which has grown faster, COST or MU?
Over the past five years, MU grew revenue faster — COST at a 9.48% CAGR versus MU at 20.34%.
Does COST or MU pay a bigger dividend?
COST yields 0.55% and MU yields 0.05% based on trailing dividends and the latest price.
Is COST or MU more profitable?
MU runs the higher net margin — COST at 3.01% versus MU at 41.49%.
Which has been the better investment, COST or MU?
Over the past 10-year, MU delivered the higher annualized total return — COST at 21.26% versus MU at 55.52%. Past performance doesn't predict future results.

Figures are sourced from reported fundamentals and the latest end-of-day price. This comparison is informational only and is not investment advice. Past performance does not predict future results. See our methodology. Compiled by TGMCharts Research · data verified June 14, 2026.