Magna International (MGA) Competitors

Tesla has higher revenue and earnings than Magna International. Magna International is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Tesla, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Magna International has a beta of 1.43, meaning that its stock price is 43% more volatile than the broader market. Comparatively, Tesla has a beta of 1.8, meaning that its stock price is 80% more volatile than the broader market.

Tesla has a net margin of 3.95% compared to Magna International's net margin of 1.60%. Magna International's return on equity of 14.01% beat Tesla's return on equity.

67.5% of Magna International shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 66.2% of Tesla shares are held by institutional investors. 0.5% of Magna International shares are held by insiders. Comparatively, 19.9% of Tesla shares are held by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that large money managers, endowments and hedge funds believe a company is poised for long-term growth.

In the previous week, Tesla had 271 more articles in the media than Magna International. MarketBeat recorded 275 mentions for Tesla and 4 mentions for Magna International. Tesla's average media sentiment score of 0.86 beat Magna International's score of 0.34 indicating that Tesla is being referred to more favorably in the news media.

Magna International presently has a consensus price target of $65.47, suggesting a potential downside of 0.80%. Tesla has a consensus price target of $405.06, suggesting a potential upside of 0.00%. Given Tesla's higher possible upside, analysts clearly believe Tesla is more favorable than Magna International.

Visteon presently has a consensus target price of $132.92, indicating a potential upside of 10.76%. Magna International has a consensus target price of $65.47, indicating a potential downside of 0.80%. Given Visteon's stronger consensus rating and higher possible upside, research analysts plainly believe Visteon is more favorable than Magna International.

Magna International has higher revenue and earnings than Visteon. Visteon is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Magna International, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Visteon has a net margin of 5.99% compared to Magna International's net margin of 1.60%. Visteon's return on equity of 15.93% beat Magna International's return on equity.

Visteon has a beta of 1.26, meaning that its share price is 26% more volatile than the broader market. Comparatively, Magna International has a beta of 1.43, meaning that its share price is 43% more volatile than the broader market.

99.7% of Visteon shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 67.5% of Magna International shares are held by institutional investors. 2.0% of Visteon shares are held by company insiders. Comparatively, 0.5% of Magna International shares are held by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that hedge funds, endowments and large money managers believe a company is poised for long-term growth.

In the previous week, Visteon had 4 more articles in the media than Magna International. MarketBeat recorded 8 mentions for Visteon and 4 mentions for Magna International. Visteon's average media sentiment score of 0.78 beat Magna International's score of 0.34 indicating that Visteon is being referred to more favorably in the media.

Visteon pays an annual dividend of $1.50 per share and has a dividend yield of 1.3%. Magna International pays an annual dividend of $1.98 per share and has a dividend yield of 3.0%. Visteon pays out 18.3% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Magna International pays out 82.8% of its earnings in the form of a dividend, suggesting it may not have sufficient earnings to cover its dividend payment in the future. Magna International has increased its dividend for 6 consecutive years. Magna International is clearly the better dividend stock, given its higher yield and longer track record of dividend growth.

Magna International has a net margin of 1.60% compared to Adient's net margin of 0.39%. Magna International's return on equity of 14.01% beat Adient's return on equity.

92.4% of Adient shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 67.5% of Magna International shares are held by institutional investors. 0.9% of Adient shares are held by insiders. Comparatively, 0.5% of Magna International shares are held by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that hedge funds, endowments and large money managers believe a stock will outperform the market over the long term.

Adient currently has a consensus price target of $28.00, suggesting a potential upside of 35.96%. Magna International has a consensus price target of $65.47, suggesting a potential downside of 0.80%. Given Adient's higher probable upside, analysts plainly believe Adient is more favorable than Magna International.

In the previous week, Magna International had 2 more articles in the media than Adient. MarketBeat recorded 4 mentions for Magna International and 2 mentions for Adient. Adient's average media sentiment score of 0.58 beat Magna International's score of 0.34 indicating that Adient is being referred to more favorably in the media.

Magna International has higher revenue and earnings than Adient. Magna International is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Adient, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Adient has a beta of 1.5, suggesting that its stock price is 50% more volatile than the broader market. Comparatively, Magna International has a beta of 1.43, suggesting that its stock price is 43% more volatile than the broader market.

Autoliv has a net margin of 6.45% compared to Magna International's net margin of 1.60%. Autoliv's return on equity of 29.03% beat Magna International's return on equity.

69.6% of Autoliv shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 67.5% of Magna International shares are held by institutional investors. 0.3% of Autoliv shares are held by company insiders. Comparatively, 0.5% of Magna International shares are held by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that endowments, large money managers and hedge funds believe a company will outperform the market over the long term.

Autoliv currently has a consensus target price of $134.87, suggesting a potential upside of 13.71%. Magna International has a consensus target price of $65.47, suggesting a potential downside of 0.80%. Given Autoliv's stronger consensus rating and higher possible upside, analysts plainly believe Autoliv is more favorable than Magna International.

Autoliv pays an annual dividend of $3.48 per share and has a dividend yield of 2.9%. Magna International pays an annual dividend of $1.98 per share and has a dividend yield of 3.0%. Autoliv pays out 37.4% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Magna International pays out 82.8% of its earnings in the form of a dividend, suggesting it may not have sufficient earnings to cover its dividend payment in the future. Autoliv has raised its dividend for 1 consecutive years and Magna International has raised its dividend for 6 consecutive years. Magna International is clearly the better dividend stock, given its higher yield and longer track record of dividend growth.

In the previous week, Autoliv had 1 more articles in the media than Magna International. MarketBeat recorded 5 mentions for Autoliv and 4 mentions for Magna International. Autoliv's average media sentiment score of 0.58 beat Magna International's score of 0.34 indicating that Autoliv is being referred to more favorably in the media.

Magna International has higher revenue and earnings than Autoliv. Autoliv is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Magna International, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Autoliv has a beta of 1.33, suggesting that its stock price is 33% more volatile than the broader market. Comparatively, Magna International has a beta of 1.43, suggesting that its stock price is 43% more volatile than the broader market.