ASML vs AMAT: side-by-side analysis
Cross-read of ASML (ASML Holding N.V.) versus AMAT (Applied Materials Inc.): ASML looks meaningfully undervalued at $1386 versus a fair-value midpoint of $1611, while AMAT appears in our peer table at a forward P/E of 41.5x and ROE of 38.9%. Our current rating for ASML is Buy.
Where ASML and AMAT sit on fair value
ASML's composite fair-value range is $1436–$1799 (midpoint $1611), versus a current price of $1386. AMAT is one of ASML's closest sector neighbours and shows up directly in the peer table inside our full report, with a market-cap of $321B, P/E of 41.5x, EV/EBITDA of 36.0x, and an operating margin of 29.9%. The cross-read is editorial: same archetype expectations, same discount-rate philosophy, different operating model.
Both names are evaluated under the same six-factor decision overlay (customer value, unit economics, TAM, moat durability, risk profile, valuation) so comparing them is apples-to-apples rather than headline-multiple-to-headline-multiple. The rating differential between ASML and AMAT is driven by where each lands across those six axes, not by who looks "cheaper" on a single screen.
Where they actually differ
ASML is classified as a growth infrastructure stock; the archetype dictates our deceleration curve, terminal multiple, and probability weights. AMAT, depending on its own archetype, will have its own calibration — and that is precisely why simple peer multiples can mislead. A 29.1× forward P/E with a PEG of 2.25 is not the same on ASML as it is on AMAT unless they share the same growth profile, capital intensity, and moat half-life.
ASML's moat assessment is 10/10, and the full moat section in the report covers the source (network effects, switching costs, intangibles, scale, etc.) plus the timeline of any threats. The cross-read against AMAT should focus on which company's economic profit (ROIC minus WACC) is wider AND more durable — that is the variable that dominates long-run total return between two same-sector names.
Which one wins on each dimension
Valuation: ASML looks meaningfully undervalued versus our fair-value midpoint. The full report's peer table compares ASML and AMAT directly on P/E, PEG, EV/EBITDA, ROE, and operating margin. Risk: the bear case for ASML is bound by the kill-scenarios list in Section 2; the equivalent for AMAT would need its own report. We do not co-rate two companies on a single page.
Capital allocation and growth runway typically separate same-sector pairs more than the headline numbers suggest. The full report's capital-allocation paragraph and TAM analysis are the lenses we recommend before deciding whether ASML or AMAT is the better expression of the same theme.
Bottom line — ASML or AMAT?
Our rating for ASML is Buy with a 85/100 confidence score; the rating already accounts for the relative-value information embedded in the peer table that includes AMAT. The cross-read is most useful when the two companies are real substitutes in a portfolio (same factor exposure, same end markets, same archetype) — otherwise the comparison is theatre.
For the full evidence on ASML, including the explicit peer multiples versus AMAT and the rest of the comp set, see the canonical report at /stocks/asml/analysis. For AMAT's standalone report, see /stocks/amat/analysis.
Frequently asked questions
ASML vs AMAT: which is cheaper today?
ASML looks meaningfully undervalued at $1386 versus a fair-value midpoint of $1611 (range $1436–$1799). The peer table inside the full report compares ASML and AMAT directly on P/E, PEG, EV/EBITDA, ROE, and operating margin.
Is ASML a better buy than AMAT?
Our current rating for ASML is Buy; we do not co-rate AMAT on this page — see AMAT's own report. The cross-read is most useful for relative positioning, not for choosing one over the other in isolation.
What archetype is ASML?
ASML Holding N.V. is classified as a growth infrastructure stock, which determines our deceleration curve, terminal multiple, and probability weights. AMAT's own archetype is in its own report.
What is ASML's moat score versus AMAT?
ASML's moat score is 10/10. The full moat section covers source, durability, and threat timeline; AMAT's moat assessment is in its own standalone report.
Research for educational purposes. Not personalised investment advice. See the full ASML report for the canonical evidence.