MetaCap

Alibaba Group (BABA) vs Liquidity Services (LQDT)

Head-to-head comparison of performance, valuation, growth, profitability and dividends. Prices delayed 15 minutes; data as of Oct 8, 2026.

Summary

Liquidity Services (LQDT) has outperformed Alibaba Group (BABA) over the past year, gaining 74.2% versus a loss of 41.6%. Over five years, LQDT leads with a +105.8% price change compared with -35.0% for BABA. Alibaba Group is the larger company by market cap ($262.95 billion vs $1.32 billion), about 199.2 times the size.

On valuation, Alibaba Group trades at a lower forward P/E (11.4x vs 22.9x for Liquidity Services). Alibaba Group pays a dividend yielding 6.85%, while Liquidity Services does not currently pay one.

Summary generated from market data by MetaCap's automated system. Methodology

Relative performance

BABA-41.64%LQDT+74.23%
+87%+16%-54%
Oct 8, 20251 yearOct 8, 2026
BABA-32.36%LQDT+102.06%
+118%+24%-69%
Oct 4, 20215 yearsOct 5, 2026

Percent change in share price from the first common trading day shown; excludes dividends.

Head-to-head

BABA versus LQDT key metrics
MetricBABALQDT
Share price$105.70$42.13
Market cap$262.95B$1.32B
1-day change-1.21%+2.01%
YTD return-27.89%+39.00%
1-year return-41.64%+74.23%
5-year return-34.96%+105.81%
P/E ratio (TTM)25.5941.30
Forward P/E11.4522.90
EPS (TTM)$4.13$1.02
Dividend yield6.85%0.00%
Annual dividend$7.24$0.00
Revenue (latest FY)$148.40B—
Revenue growth (YoY)+8.09%—
Net income (latest FY)$15.02B—
Gross margin39.81%—
Operating margin4.90%—
Net margin10.12%—
52-week high$182.50$45.00
52-week low$91.99$21.67
Distance from 52-week high-42.08%-6.38%
Analyst consensusstrong_buynone
Avg. price target upside+75.48%+21.05%
Average volume10.46M229.51K
Shares outstanding2.49B31.33M
Employees132,165818
SectorConsumer DiscretionaryConsumer Discretionary
IndustryBusiness ServicesBusiness Services

Highlighted cells mark the higher value for growth, returns, margins and yield, and the lower value for P/E ratios. Highlighting is a mechanical comparison, not a recommendation.

Key differences

  • Alibaba Group is about 199.2 times larger than Liquidity Services by market value ($262.95B vs $1.32B).
  • LQDT has outperformed BABA by 115.9 percentage points over the past year.
  • Liquidity Services trades at a higher earnings multiple (41.3x vs 25.6x trailing P/E).
  • Alibaba Group offers a meaningfully higher dividend yield (6.85% vs 0.00%).

About Alibaba Group

BABA stock →

Alibaba Group Holding Limited, through its subsidiaries, provides technology infrastructure and marketing reach to help merchants, brands, retailers, and other businesses in the People's Republic of China and internationally. It operates through the Alibaba China E-Commerce Group, Alibaba International Digital Commerce Group, Cloud Intelligence Group, and All Others segments.

Consumer Discretionary · Business Services · 132,165 employees

About Liquidity Services

LQDT stock →

Liquidity Services, Inc. engages in the provision of e-commerce marketplaces, self-directed auction listing tools, and value-added services in the United States and internationally.

Consumer Discretionary · Business Services · 818 employees

BABA vs LQDT FAQ

Which is bigger, Alibaba Group or Liquidity Services?

Alibaba Group (BABA) is larger, with a market capitalization of $262.95B compared with $1.32B for Liquidity Services (LQDT).

Which stock has performed better over the past year, BABA or LQDT?

LQDT returned +74.23% over the past 12 months, compared with -41.64% for BABA (price return, excluding dividends). Past performance does not predict future results.

Which has the lower P/E ratio, BABA or LQDT?

BABA has the lower trailing P/E at 25.6, versus 41.3 for LQDT. A lower P/E is not by itself a sign of a better investment; it can reflect slower expected growth or higher risk.

Which pays a higher dividend, Alibaba Group or Liquidity Services?

Alibaba Group pays a dividend yielding 6.85%, while Liquidity Services does not currently pay a regular dividend.

Are Alibaba Group and Liquidity Services in the same industry?

Yes. Both are classified in the Business Services industry within the Consumer Discretionary sector.

More comparisons