Broadcom Inc. vs International Business Machines Corporation: Strategic Comparison
Our analysts compile business strategy profiles from public financial filings, press releases, and analyst reports. Each profile is reviewed for accuracy before publication by our editorial desk and updated on a rolling basis.
Key Differences at a Glance
| Field | Broadcom Inc. | International Business Machines Corporation |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $48.5B | $61.8B |
| Founded | 1991 | 1911 |
| Employees | 20,000 | 282,000 |
| Market Cap | $620.4B | $175.2B |
| Headquarters | United States | United States |
| Revenue / Employee | $2.42M / employee | $219k / employee |
| Valuation Multiple | 12.8x P/S | 2.8x P/S |
Current Strategic Alignment & Momentum
Executive Catalyst & Theme Analysis (September 2026)
Broadcom Inc. Strategic Vector
FY2025 Baseline*Strategic Analysis (September 2026 Update):* As Broadcom Inc. navigates the Semiconductors & Enterprise Software market from its headquarters in San Jose, California (founded in 1991), a pivotal strategic theme is **Workflow Automation**. With reported annual revenue of $48.5B (FY2025) and a global workforce of 20,000 employees, the company's execution on workflow automation will directly influence its market share against peers such as Nvidia, Intel, Qualcomm.
International Business Machines Corporation Strategic Vector
FY2025 Baseline*Strategic Analysis (September 2026 Update):* As International Business Machines Corporation navigates the Enterprise technology, hybrid cloud, AI, and consulting services market from its headquarters in Armonk, New York (founded in 1911), a pivotal strategic theme is **Workflow Automation**. With reported annual revenue of $61.8B (FY2025) and a global workforce of 282,000 employees, the company's execution on workflow automation will directly influence its market share against peers such as Microsoft, Google, Oracle.
Quick Stats Comparison
| Metric | Broadcom Inc. | International Business Machines Corporation |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $48.5B | $61.8B |
| Founded | 1991 | 1911 |
| Headquarters | San Jose, California | Armonk, New York |
| Market Cap | $620.4B | $175.2B |
| Employees | 20,000 | 282,000 |
| Revenue / Employee | $2.42M / employee | $219k / employee |
| Valuation Multiple | 12.8x P/S | 2.8x P/S |
Broadcom Inc. Revenue vs International Business Machines Corporation Revenue — Year by Year
| Year | Broadcom Inc. | International Business Machines Corporation | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | $63.9B | $67.5B | International Business Machines Corporation |
| 2024 | $51.6B | $62.8B | International Business Machines Corporation |
| 2023 | $35.8B | $61.9B | International Business Machines Corporation |
| 2022 | N/A | $60.5B | International Business Machines Corporation |
| 2021 | N/A | $57.4B | International Business Machines Corporation |
Business Model Breakdown
Overview: Broadcom Inc. vs International Business Machines Corporation
This in-depth comparison examines Broadcom Inc. and International Business Machines Corporation across revenue, market value, business model, competitive positioning, and long-term growth strategy. Whether you are researching Broadcom Inc. on its own, evaluating International Business Machines Corporation, or weighing the two companies side by side, the breakdown below highlights where each company leads and where the gap between Broadcom Inc. and International Business Machines Corporation is widest.
On the headline numbers, Broadcom Inc. reports annual revenue of $48.5B against $61.8B for International Business Machines Corporation, while their respective market capitalizations stand at $620.4B and $175.2B. Broadcom Inc. is headquartered in United States and International Business Machines Corporation operates from United States, and those different home markets shape how each company competes.
Broadcom Inc.: Broadcom combines a long operating history with a current strategy shaped by FY2025 financial results, leadership priorities, and competitive pressure.
International Business Machines Corporation: IBM mainframes process 87% of global credit card transactions. That single statistic — quietly persistent, rarely mentioned in technology journalism — explains why IBM exists at a scale that pure cloud narratives cannot account for. The System/360, launched in 1964 as a $5 billion bet that was the most expensive privately funded project in American history at the time, created the mainframe architecture that banks, insurers, and governments have built their core systems on for 60 years. Those systems don't migrate to AWS because the migration risk is existential. The $34 billion Red Hat acquisition in 2019 — the largest software deal in history at the time — was IBM's bet that the enterprise technology market was reorganizing around hybrid cloud rather than pure public cloud migration. The thesis is that large organizations don't move everything to a single cloud provider; they operate across multiple clouds and on-premises infrastructure simultaneously, and they need middleware, management software, and security tools that work across that heterogeneous environment. Red Hat's OpenShift platform sits at the center of that architecture. IBM Research has produced 5 Nobel Prizes and 6 Turing Awards. No other corporate research organization has that record. The depth of fundamental scientific contribution is unusual for a company that analysts primarily evaluate on quarterly consulting revenue growth. The quantum computing program, the materials science work, the AI research — these represent intellectual investments with long time horizons that don't appear in GAAP income statements until commercialization. Revenue grew from $57.4 billion in 2021 to $62.8 billion in 2024. The trajectory is modest but consistent — a company that divested its managed infrastructure services business (Kyndryl) in 2021 and rebuilt its revenue base around higher-margin software and consulting.
Business Models: How Broadcom Inc. and International Business Machines Corporation Make Money
Broadcom Inc. and International Business Machines Corporation pursue distinct approaches to generating revenue, and understanding how each company operates is the foundation of any fair comparison between Broadcom Inc. and International Business Machines Corporation.
Broadcom Inc. business model: Broadcom operates a specialized acquisition model. The company targets entrenched, complex technologies (like smartphone Wi-Fi chips or critical enterprise software) that vast corporations cannot function without. Upon acquisition, Broadcom instantly guts the sales and marketing departments, stops investing in experimental R&D, and raises prices on the remaining "sticky" customer base, generating, high-margin cash flow to fund the next acquisition. Broadcom operates a specialized, dual-engine business model consisting of essential semiconductor solutions and sticky enterprise software infrastructure. In its semiconductor division, Broadcom eschews generic mass-market chips, instead focusing on complex, mission-critical custom silicon (like networking switches and custom AI accelerators) for a concentrated base of hyperscale cloud providers and smartphone manufacturers (like Apple). In its software division, built through aggressive acquisitions of CA Technologies, Symantec, and VMware, Broadcom targets Fortune 500 enterprises. The company generates predictable, recurring SaaS and licensing revenues from these software acquisitions by focusing on core products, cutting peripheral R&D, and migrating existing customers to higher-value subscription models. This unique combination of high-margin, specialized hardware monopolies paired with embedded, recurring enterprise software makes Broadcom a resilient, cash-generating machine that consistently funds dividend payouts and further aggressive consolidation within the tech sector.
International Business Machines Corporation business model: IBM no longer relies on selling mainframes. Following the historic $34 billion purchase of Red Hat, the company's financial engine is now driven by hybrid cloud software subscriptions and the lucrative consulting services required to integrate complex, regulated IT environments. This fundamental shift away from legacy hardware explicitly acknowledges that the future of enterprise technology relies on flexible, scalable cloud architectures. By integrating Red Hat's open-source OpenShift platform, IBM provides multinational corporations with the vital ability to securely manage their proprietary data across multiple independent cloud providers without being locked into a single vendor's ecosystem. the company leverages its formidable global consulting division to actively guide complex organizations through these multi-year digital transformations, effectively generating continuous, high-margin revenue streams long after the initial software deployment. This strategic combination of high-value subscription software and specialized enterprise consulting ensures IBM remains embedded within the core operational infrastructure of the world's most critical financial, government, and healthcare institutions. By continually evolving its service offerings to meet unprecedented global demand for artificial intelligence integration, IBM maintains its historic position as the premier technology partner for the world's largest corporate entities, securing long-term profitability despite intense market competition. This robust and diversified revenue generation model ensures long-term fiscal stability.
Competitive Advantage: Broadcom Inc. vs International Business Machines Corporation
The durability of a company's moat often decides long-term winners. Here is how the competitive advantages of Broadcom Inc. stack up against those of International Business Machines Corporation.
Broadcom Inc. competitive advantage: The ethernet switching chips that route data across the world's hyperscale data centers, the Wi-Fi and Bluetooth radios embedded in virtually every iPhone Apple has shipped in over a decade, the storage controllers managing enterprise disk arrays, and the broadband gateway chips terminating cable modems in tens of millions of American homes — all of these are Broadcom products. The company's approach to semiconductor design is explicitly not to compete across all categories — it does not make CPUs, consumer GPUs for gaming, or memory chips — but rather to identify connectivity, networking, and signal processing niches where the economics favor long design cycles, high switching costs, and customer relationships that span decades rather than product generations. Broadcom's Tomahawk and Trident series of ethernet switching ASICs are the industry standard for hyperscale data center switching fabrics. The company holds an estimated 60 to 70 percent share of the merchant silicon market for high-end data center switching, a position reinforced by an enormous software ecosystem and years of co-engineering with network operating system vendors. This guidance, when it was articulated in late 2024, was one of the most bullish data points from any technology company regarding the scale of the AI infrastructure investment cycle. Customers who invest years of software integration work atop Broadcom silicon have enormous switching costs. The industry debate between InfiniBand (favored by Nvidia for training clusters) and ethernet (where Broadcom leads) plays out every time a hyperscaler designs a new AI data center. IBM's Red Hat OpenShift and the broader open-source Kubernetes ecosystem represent a longer-term architectural alternative — not a near-term VMware replacement for most enterprises, but a destination toward which application modernization efforts are directionally pointed. The Apple relationship provides Broadcom with guaranteed volume scale that makes its Wi-Fi business economically distinctive, but any disruption to that relationship would erode the cost position that makes Broadcom competitive in the broader merchant wireless market. Across these battlegrounds, what distinguishes Broadcom is not that it is winning every fight — in some areas it is conceding markets it cannot defend profitably — but that it has systematically concentrated its resources in segments where switching costs are highest, customer relationships are deepest, and technological leads, once established, are durable. This curatorial approach to competition, unusual for a company of Broadcom's scale, is the strategic signature of the Hock Tan era and the clearest explanation for how a company that does not build the flashiest chips or write the most innovative software has become one of the most valuable technology companies on earth. For partners in the VMware ecosystem — the thousands of value-added resellers, managed service providers, and system integrators who had built businesses around VMware's channel program — Broadcom's simplification of the partner program and reduction of channel incentives created genuine business disruption. Finally, Broadcom faces the challenge of integration complexity at scale. Broadcom's competitive advantages are grounded in structural realities of its end markets rather than temporary technological leads, and understanding why the company wins consistently requires looking beyond product specifications to the economic architecture of customer relationships. The most powerful advantage is switching cost density — a concept that describes not merely the cost of changing a software contract but the cascading technical, operational, and financial cost of replacing a technology that is embedded across an organization's entire infrastructure. The same logic applies on the semiconductor side: the hardware and software ecosystem built atop a Broadcom Tomahawk switching ASIC — including the NOS software, management tools, and automation frameworks — makes displacing the silicon a multi-year engineering project. The company's custom AI accelerator program works so with hyperscaler customers' internal teams that the resulting chips are, in many ways, co-owned intellectual achievements. Scale in manufacturing and design is a third pillar. Finally, Broadcom's financial model itself is a competitive advantage. Management has indicated that additional hyperscalers are evaluating custom ASIC programs, and winning one or two additional programs would materially expand the serviceable addressable market. The networking adjacency is equally significant: as AI clusters scale from thousands to hundreds of thousands of interconnected chips, the demand for high-bandwidth, low-latency ethernet switching — precisely Broadcom's core competency — scales proportionally.
International Business Machines Corporation competitive advantage: The firms frequently compete for the same transformation deals, with Accenture winning on scale and IBM winning on technical depth. IBM doesn't operate hyperscale infrastructure and has no intention of doing so. If any hyperscaler decides to offer integrated Kubernetes management that makes OpenShift less necessary, IBM's differentiation narrows. IBM's competitive advantage is invisible to anyone who evaluates technology companies by consumer brand recognition or developer mindshare. These systems are IBM's installed base, and the switching costs they represent are nearly infinite in practical terms. That installed base creates a gravity well that pulls in adjacent revenue. Each product sold deepens the relationship and raises the switching cost further. Red Hat's competitive advantage is different in kind but equally durable. The operational knowledge, security configurations, and integration work create switching costs that compound with each passing quarter. And because OpenShift runs on any cloud (AWS, Azure, GCP, on-premises), it positions IBM as the neutral orchestration layer in multi-cloud environments — a position no hyperscaler can credibly occupy because each one has an incentive to lock customers into its own stack. IBM Research is a third competitive advantage that defies easy financial quantification. The final advantage is institutional trust in regulated industries. That accumulated trust — knowing that IBM will still exist in 20 years, will comply with regulations, will provide support contracts, will not compromise data sovereignty — is a competitive asset that no startup and few hyperscalers can match. IBM's roadmap targets quantum advantage for specific enterprise use cases (drug discovery, financial risk modeling, materials science, supply chain optimization) by 2028-2030.
Growth Strategy: Where Broadcom Inc. and International Business Machines Corporation Are Headed
Future prospects matter as much as current results. The growth strategies below explain how Broadcom Inc. and International Business Machines Corporation each plan to expand from here.
Broadcom Inc. growth strategy: Broadcom combines high-share semiconductor franchises with infrastructure software, then applies disciplined product focus, cost control, and cash-return policies.
International Business Machines Corporation growth strategy: The company spun off its managed infrastructure services as Kyndryl Holdings in November 2021 to focus on higher-margin software and consulting. It's not growing in unit terms, but it generates extraordinary cash flow. The problem is, the quantum race is still early enough that leadership positions could shift, but IBM's systematic roadmap (from 1,121 qubits today toward 100,000+ qubits by 2033) and enterprise-focused approach give it a credible claim to being the default choice for enterprise quantum adoption. IBM's financial narrative is a story of deliberate portfolio compression — trading top-line revenue for higher margins, better growth quality, and a more predictable earnings stream. Pre-tax income margins expanded as IBM shed the lower-margin Kyndryl business (managed infrastructure operated at roughly 15-18% margins) and invested in higher-margin software. For investors, the critical metrics are: Software revenue growth (needs to sustain high-single-digits to justify the valuation re-rating), consulting book-to-bill ratio (a leading indicator of future revenue), and Red Hat's growth rate (the canary in the coal mine for the entire hybrid cloud thesis). If they accelerate, IBM's stock — which has already more than doubled from its 2022 lows — has further to run. Ask a CIO at a Fortune 500 bank about IBM and you'll hear 'critical infrastructure partner' and 'Red Hat' and 'we're evaluating watsonx.' These are two different realities, and IBM has to win in both simultaneously. The engineers who would be most effective building enterprise AI tools often prefer to work on the sexier frontier models, even if the enterprise work is more commercially important. This means IBM's hybrid cloud strategy depends on Red Hat's software running on other companies' infrastructure — a position that creates genuine value for customers but also means IBM is building on top of its competitors' foundations. While no one is migrating their mainframe workloads tomorrow, the generational change in IT leadership means that new CIOs are less likely to have grown up with z/OS and more likely to default toward cloud-native architectures for new workloads. IBM needs to convince each generation of technology leaders that the mainframe is a modern platform worth investing in, not a legacy system to be replaced when the older engineers retire. Once an organization standardizes on OpenShift for container orchestration, its developers write code, build pipelines, and manage deployments using OpenShift-specific patterns. IBM's growth strategy under Arvind Krishna is built on three interconnected pillars: expand hybrid cloud adoption through Red Hat, become the enterprise AI platform of choice through watsonx, and use consulting as the delivery mechanism that pulls both through. IBM's growth thesis is that each new application modernized onto OpenShift increases the customer's Red Hat consumption and creates opportunities for adjacent IBM software (automation, security, data). The land-and-expand motion within existing accounts is more reliable than new customer acquisition and carries lower sales costs. Watsonx is the AI growth vector. The strategy is not to compete with OpenAI on model capability but to compete on enterprise deployment — helping companies fine-tune models on their proprietary data, deploy them inside their security perimeter, and govern their use across the organization. Early traction includes partnerships with SAP, Salesforce, and Adobe to embed watsonx capabilities into their enterprise applications. Here's why: if AI governance and compliance become mandatory (likely given EU AI Act and similar regulations), IBM's early investment in trustworthy AI positions it as a compliance-ready platform. Consulting growth depends on the structural demand for technology transformation. IBM Consulting's growth strategy is to increase the proportion of engagements that include IBM software, creating a consultative selling motion where the consulting team identifies opportunities and pulls through Software revenue. This 'Consulting-to-Software' flywheel is the core of IBM's cross-segment growth thesis. Acquisitions continue to play a role, focused on tuck-in purchases that add capabilities to the platform. Geographic expansion targets growth markets where digital transformation is earlier stage — India, Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and Africa. Watsonx and enterprise AI represent IBM's most significant growth opportunity since the mainframe era. If quantum delivers on its theoretical promise, IBM's decade-long head start in building quantum hardware, developing quantum algorithms, and building an enterprise quantum user base could create a new $10-50 billion annual market. If quantum remains laboratory-grade for another decade, the investment is manageable but the payoff is delayed. The most likely outcome for IBM over the next five years: steady mid-single-digit revenue growth driven by Software and Consulting, continued margin expansion, increasing free cash flow that supports dividend growth and tuck-in acquisitions, and gradual re-rating from 'legacy tech' to 'hybrid cloud and AI platform company.' Not exciting by startup standards.
Financial Picture: Broadcom Inc. vs International Business Machines Corporation
A closer look at the financial trajectory of Broadcom Inc. and International Business Machines Corporation rounds out the comparison.
Broadcom Inc.: Broadcom operates as one of the most critical, yet under-the-radar, infrastructural beneficiaries of the generative AI boom. Under the ruthless efficiency of CEO Hock Tan, the semiconductor and software giant generated exactly $48.5 billion in revenue and commands a $620.4 billion market cap with an optimized workforce of exactly 20000 employees. Broadcom's hardware division generates high-margin cash flows from designing custom AI ASICs (Application-Specific Integrated Circuits) for hyperscalers like Google and Meta, alongside its dominance in networking chips (Tomahawk). Simultaneously, the company completed the brutal integration of VMware, raising prices and shifting enterprise customers to subscription models, generating immense software cash flow despite customer backlash.
International Business Machines Corporation: IBM is experiencing a lucrative renaissance driven entirely by its dominant hybrid cloud and enterprise AI strategy. Under CEO Arvind Krishna, the historic tech giant generated exactly $61.8 billion in revenue and maintains a $175.2 billion market cap with exactly 282000 employees. The financial narrative in 2026 is defined by unprecedented consulting margins; IBM is extracting revenue by integrating complex, secure generative AI models into the complex legacy infrastructure of regulated global banks and governments.
Company-Specific SWOT Notes
Broadcom Inc.
Broadcom holds estimated 60-70 percent merchant market share in hyperscale data center ethernet switching silicon, near-dominant share in cable modem chipsets, and the leading position in enterprise virtualization software through VMware.
Broadcom generated approximately $19.
The VMware acquisition left Broadcom with approximately $67 billion in long-term debt as of fiscal year-end 2024, representing a significant leverage ratio relative to even the company's exceptional EBITDA generation.
The AI infrastructure buildout represents the largest semiconductor demand expansion in decades.
The European Union opened an investigation in mid-2024 into Broadcom's VMware licensing practices, specifically scrutinizing whether the elimination of perpetual licenses and the requirement for VCF bundle subscriptions constitutes anti-competitive behavior.
International Business Machines Corporation
IBM's installed base in mission-critical enterprise systems (mainframes processing 87% of credit card transactions, core banking, airline reservations) creates switching costs that are effectively infinite for most large clients.
Red Hat OpenShift is the leading enterprise Kubernetes platform with 4,000+ enterprise customers, providing IBM a credible hybrid cloud platform that runs on any infrastructure including competitors' clouds.
IBM lacks hyperscale cloud infrastructure, meaning its hybrid cloud strategy depends on Red Hat software running on competitors' data centers.
IBM's brand perception among developers and younger technology professionals is weak, making talent recruitment and new customer acquisition in cloud-native organizations difficult.
Enterprise AI adoption is accelerating but most organizations lack the infrastructure to deploy AI safely on proprietary data.
Hyperscalers (AWS, Azure, GCP) are investing $50-80B annually in AI infrastructure and may offer integrated Kubernetes and AI platforms that reduce the need for Red Hat and watsonx as separate products.
Head-to-Head Scorecard
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue Scale | International Business Machines Corporation | International Business Machines Corporation reports the larger revenue base ($61.8B), which serves as a core operational scale signal. |
| Employee Productivity | Broadcom Inc. | Broadcom Inc. generates higher revenue per employee ($2.42M / employee vs $219k / employee), signaling greater operational leverage. |
| Valuation Multiple | Broadcom Inc. | Broadcom Inc. commands a higher valuation multiple (12.8x P/S vs 2.8x P/S), indicating greater investor premium on future growth. |
| Profitability Potential | Comparable | Both organizations prioritize market penetration or are at equivalent reporting tiers. |
| Company Age | International Business Machines Corporation | Founded in 1991 vs 1911. The earlier pioneer typically commands longer historical institutional legacy. |
| Innovation Moat | International Business Machines Corporation | Higher aggregate count of major acquisitions and key R&D releases indicates a more active technology absorption velocity. |
| Scale (Employees) | International Business Machines Corporation | A significantly larger reported workforce supports enhanced global distribution capability. |
| Market Cap | Broadcom Inc. | Higher public valuation denotes greater forward-looking investor conviction in earnings potential. |
| Future Outlook | Tied | Strategic auditing assesses that both maintain defensive leadership vectors within their core market clusters. |
Who Wins Each Category?
International Business Machines Corporation reports the larger revenue base ($61.8B), which serves as a core operational scale signal.
Broadcom Inc. generates higher revenue per employee ($2.42M / employee vs $219k / employee), signaling greater operational leverage.
Broadcom Inc. commands a higher valuation multiple (12.8x P/S vs 2.8x P/S), indicating greater investor premium on future growth.
Both organizations prioritize market penetration or are at equivalent reporting tiers.
Founded in 1991 vs 1911. The earlier pioneer typically commands longer historical institutional legacy.
Who Wins: Broadcom Inc. or International Business Machines Corporation?
Reviewed by Swet Parvadiya, September 2026 - Author Profile
Our analysts compile business strategy profiles from public financial filings, press releases, and analyst reports. Each profile is reviewed for accuracy before publication by our editorial desk and updated on a rolling basis.
Frequently Asked Questions: Broadcom Inc. vs International Business Machines Corporation
Is Broadcom Inc. better than International Business Machines Corporation?
Verdict: Between Broadcom Inc. and International Business Machines Corporation, International Business Machines Corporation is the stronger overall option based on higher annual revenue. The decision still depends on which factors matter most for your needs, but on the weight of the evidence above, International Business Machines Corporation comes out ahead in this Broadcom Inc. vs International Business Machines Corporation comparison.
Who earns more — Broadcom Inc. or International Business Machines Corporation?
International Business Machines Corporation earns more with $61.8B in annual revenue versus Broadcom Inc.'s $48.5B. International Business Machines Corporation leads on total revenue based on latest verified figures.
Which company has higher revenue — Broadcom Inc. or International Business Machines Corporation?
Broadcom Inc. reported $48.5B, while International Business Machines Corporation reported $61.8B. The revenue leader is International Business Machines Corporation based on latest verified figures.
Broadcom Inc. revenue vs International Business Machines Corporation revenue — which is higher?
Broadcom Inc. revenue: $48.5B. International Business Machines Corporation revenue: $48.5B. International Business Machines Corporation has the larger revenue base of the two companies.
Which company generates more revenue per employee — Broadcom Inc. or International Business Machines Corporation?
Broadcom Inc. leads in workforce productivity, generating $2.42M / employee per employee compared to $219k / employee for International Business Machines Corporation. Broadcom Inc. operates with a team of 20,000 employees while International Business Machines Corporation employs 282,000.
What are the current strategic priorities for Broadcom Inc. vs International Business Machines Corporation in 2026?
In 2026, Broadcom Inc. is prioritizing *Strategic Analysis (September 2026 Update):* As Broadcom Inc., while International Business Machines Corporation is focusing on *Strategic Analysis (September 2026 Update):* As International Business Machines Corporation navigates the Enterprise technology, hybrid cloud, AI, and consulting services market from its headquarters in Armonk, New York (founded in 1911), a pivotal strategic theme is **Workflow Automation**.. These strategic vectors determine how each company allocates capital and defends its moat in Semiconductors & Enterprise Software.
How do the valuation multiples of Broadcom Inc. and International Business Machines Corporation compare?
On a price-to-sales basis, Broadcom Inc. trades at 12.8x P/S with a market capitalization of $620.4B on $48.5B in revenue, compared to 2.8x P/S for International Business Machines Corporation with a market capitalization of $175.2B on $61.8B in revenue.
Sources & References
- SEC EDGAR: Broadcom Inc. Annual Filings (10-K, 8-K)
- Broadcom Inc. Corporate Website
- Broadcom Inc. Annual Report 2025 - Revenue and Financial Data
- sec.gov
- investors.broadcom.com
- investors.broadcom.com
- data.sec.gov
- SEC EDGAR: International Business Machines Corporation Annual Filings (10-K, 8-K)
- International Business Machines Corporation Corporate Website
- International Business Machines Corporation Annual Report 2025 - Revenue and Financial Data
- ibm.com
- sec.gov
- sec.gov
- ibm.com
Cite This Page
Automatically generated citations for researchers.
CorpDigest. (2026). Broadcom Inc. vs International Business Machines Corporation Comparison. Retrieved , from
CorpDigest. "Broadcom Inc. vs International Business Machines Corporation Comparison." CorpDigest, 2026, . Accessed .
CorpDigest. "Broadcom Inc. vs International Business Machines Corporation Comparison." CorpDigest. 2026. Accessed . .