Oracle is the smaller cloud business, but it currently has the faster reported cloud-growth profile; AWS remains the largest disclosed cloud operation and profit pool, while Azure and Google Cloud combine strong growth with increasingly material profitability. A sound stock comparison requires more than lining up headline percentages. Normalize each company’s fiscal period, define what its cloud segment includes, separate segment profit from company-wide profit, and compare capital spending, free cash flow, balance-sheet risk, AI capacity, customer concentration and valuation on the same date.
Start with comparable fiscal periods and segment definitions
The four companies do not report identical businesses or on identical calendars. Oracle reports a fiscal year that differs from the periods used by Amazon, Microsoft and Alphabet. Even when two companies use the word “cloud,” one may be reporting infrastructure consumption, another a broad cloud segment, and another a combined figure that includes support or applications.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Use the period named in each company’s filing, and put that period beside every number in your worksheet. Do not present an Oracle fiscal-year figure as if it were a calendar-year result, and do not treat an annual run rate as the same thing as recognized revenue.
Recommended Free Tools
| Company | Cloud measure disclosed | Period | Growth or scale | Profit figure disclosed | Comparability warning |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oracle | Infrastructure cloud services and license support | Oracle FY2025 | $24.646 billion; reported growth 16% (17% in constant currency) | Oracle GAAP operating income: $17.7 billion | The $24.646 billion combines infrastructure cloud services with license support; it is not an OCI-only revenue line. The $17.7 billion is company-wide, not cloud-segment operating income. |
| AWS | AWS segment sales | Amazon 2025 | About $128.7 billion, up 20% | AWS operating income: $45.606 billion | AWS provides a segment revenue and profit disclosure that is more directly usable than Oracle’s combined cloud-and-support measure. |
| Microsoft | Azure and other cloud services growth | Microsoft FY2025 | 34% | Not stated as a directly comparable Azure operating-income line in the cited annual reporting | Do not manufacture an Azure margin from Microsoft’s broader segment disclosures. |
| Alphabet | Google Cloud segment | Alphabet 2025 | Annual run rate above $70 billion at the end of 2025 | Google Cloud operating income: $13.910 billion, versus $6.112 billion in 2024 | An annual run rate is a point-in-time scale indicator, not the same measure as full-year revenue. |
All dollar figures above should remain labeled with the reporting company and period when you use them in a spreadsheet or investment memo. That simple discipline prevents the most common error in cloud-stock comparisons: treating unlike denominators as if they were interchangeable.
#1 Best Overall
What the disclosed growth rates actually say
Oracle: smaller base, accelerating cloud ambition
Oracle’s infrastructure cloud services and license support reached $24.646 billion in FY2025, up 16% reported and 17% in constant currency. Because support revenue is included, that percentage is not a pure measure of OCI infrastructure consumption. It is nevertheless useful for tracking the company’s combined infrastructure-and-support economic engine.
Management forecast total cloud growth of 24% in FY2025 rising to more than 40% in FY2026. “Total cloud” is broader than the infrastructure-and-support figure above, so the forecast should not be applied mechanically to the $24.646 billion base. It is also forward-looking: delivery of data-center capacity, customer demand and overall infrastructure spending must all support the forecast.
AWS: the largest disclosed cloud revenue and profit pool
AWS reported approximately $128.7 billion of 2025 sales, up 20%, with $45.606 billion of operating income. That combination gives AWS a scale and earnings advantage that smaller cloud businesses must overcome through faster growth, differentiated workloads or a lower valuation.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte Driver Updater FREEFix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Outbyte PC Repair FREERepair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →AWS’s 20% rate is not directly comparable with Oracle’s 16% because the businesses and denominators differ. AWS’s figure is a segment sales measure; Oracle’s includes license support. The useful conclusion is directional: AWS is growing from a much larger base while producing the largest disclosed cloud operating-profit pool in this group.
Azure: strong growth, incomplete profit visibility
Microsoft reported 34% growth for Azure and other cloud services in FY2025. That is the fastest directly stated percentage among the four headline growth figures, but Microsoft does not provide a directly comparable Azure operating-income line in the cited annual reporting. Microsoft’s reporting structure therefore supports a growth comparison more readily than a margin comparison.
Do not infer that Azure is more or less profitable than AWS or Google Cloud from the 34% growth rate. Growth and profitability answer different questions, and the disclosed segment boundaries are not the same.
Rank #2
- Ideal for Gifting
- Ideal for a bookworm
- Compact for travelling
Google Cloud: growth paired with a sharply higher profit contribution
Google Cloud generated $13.910 billion of operating income in 2025, up from $6.112 billion in 2024. Alphabet also reported a Google Cloud annual run rate above $70 billion at the end of 2025. The run-rate figure shows the business’s scale at that point in time; it should not be substituted for a full-year revenue number.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Alphabet’s consolidated 2025 revenue was $402.836 billion and its consolidated operating margin was 32%. Those Alphabet-wide figures provide context for the parent company but are not Google Cloud margins. Alphabet-level artificial-intelligence research costs are not allocated to Google Cloud in a way that creates a clean, standalone comparison with AWS’s segment operating income.
How to compare profitability without inventing an Azure margin
| Profitability question | Oracle | AWS | Azure | Google Cloud |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Is a cloud-segment operating-income figure disclosed? | No comparable cloud-segment figure in the cited data; Oracle’s $17.7 billion is company-wide GAAP operating income. | Yes: $45.606 billion of AWS operating income in 2025. | No directly comparable Azure operating-income line in the cited annual reporting. | Yes: $13.910 billion in 2025. |
| Can you calculate a defensible segment operating margin from the cited figures? | No, because the revenue and profit scopes differ. | Yes, using AWS segment sales and AWS operating income, subject to the company’s own segment definitions. | No, not from the cited disclosure. | Not from the run-rate figure alone; use the matching full-year Google Cloud revenue from the filing. |
| What is the key interpretation? | Cloud growth may be strategically important even though the available profit number covers the whole company. | Largest disclosed cloud profit pool and a useful benchmark for operating leverage. | High growth is clear; segment profitability requires additional Microsoft disclosure or a carefully defined proxy. | Profitability improved substantially year over year, but parent-level AI research economics are not allocated directly to the segment. |
A practical ranking on disclosed segment operating profit is therefore AWS first by absolute dollars, Google Cloud second among the businesses with explicit 2025 cloud operating income, and Oracle and Azure not rankable on a like-for-like basis from these figures. That is a disclosure ranking, not a claim that Oracle or Azure are intrinsically less profitable.
Capital intensity, free cash flow and return on invested capital
Cloud revenue can grow while shareholder cash returns deteriorate. AI workloads require servers, networking, power, land and data-center capacity before the related revenue fully arrives. For each company, collect the following from the same annual filing and period:
- Capital expenditures, separated where possible between data centers, servers, networking and other property.
- Depreciation and amortization, which indicate how quickly prior investment is being expensed.
- Contractual data-center, equipment or capacity commitments.
- Operating cash flow, capital expenditures and free cash flow using one consistent company definition.
- Invested capital and operating profit for a return-on-invested-capital calculation.
AWS’s scale advantage comes with heavy infrastructure investment. Oracle’s acceleration also depends on delivering capacity, so a high growth forecast does not automatically imply high near-term free-cash-flow conversion. Google Cloud’s improved operating income is encouraging, but its parent-level AI research spending is not assigned to the segment in a way that isolates the cloud unit’s total economic burden. Microsoft’s Azure growth likewise needs to be read alongside Microsoft-wide infrastructure spending rather than a guessed Azure margin.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problems2Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minute3Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsWithout synchronized capex, free-cash-flow and invested-capital figures in the supplied disclosures, there is no defensible numerical ranking of the four companies on capital intensity or free-cash-flow yield. The correct method is to refresh those figures on one date and calculate them consistently, rather than label a company “capital-light” from revenue growth alone.
Scale, switching costs and AI capacity
Scale
AWS has the largest disclosed cloud sales figure in this comparison. Google Cloud’s reported run rate above $70 billion and Azure’s 34% growth show substantial scale, while Oracle remains smaller on the disclosed $24.646 billion infrastructure-and-support measure.
Enterprise and database relationships
Oracle’s potential moat is tied to installed enterprise relationships, databases and data platforms that customers may be reluctant to re-engineer. That advantage is most relevant when a workload must remain close to Oracle data, applications or licensing arrangements. It should be tested customer by customer; a database relationship is not an automatic guarantee of OCI share.
Developer ecosystems and geographic availability
For AWS, Azure and Google Cloud, evaluate the breadth of developer tools, managed services, geographic regions, partner channels and migration programs. For Oracle, examine whether its database-centered services are available in the regions and deployment models a target customer requires. The relevant question is not which logo has the longest service list, but whether a customer can deploy, secure and operate its specific workload without adding unacceptable complexity.
AI capacity
AI capacity should be measured with comparable evidence: accelerator availability, power and data-center additions, networking capacity, customer reservation commitments, model and platform demand, and the capital required to supply that demand. The cited figures do not provide accelerator counts or a synchronized capacity table for these four companies, so a numerical AI-capacity ranking would be false precision.
Instead, treat AI capacity as an execution test. Ask whether each company can obtain hardware, bring power and facilities online, keep utilization high and earn an adequate return after depreciation. AI infrastructure can lift reported revenue while depressing near-term cash conversion if spending arrives ahead of customer billing.
Oracle’s multicloud strategy and customer concentration
Oracle’s database placement on AWS, Azure and Google Cloud can expand distribution beyond OCI’s own regions. Larry Ellison said, “MultiCloud database revenue from Amazon, Google and Azure grew 115% from Q3 to Q4.” That is management commentary about Oracle’s own multicloud database revenue, not independent market-share evidence, and the quarter-to-quarter comparison should not be annualized without additional data.
Rank #4
Multicloud distribution can work in two directions. It may let Oracle monetize database demand where a customer already prefers another infrastructure provider, but it may also leave Oracle dependent on partners’ sales channels, technical integration and commercial terms. Track multicloud revenue separately from OCI consumption so that growth is not attributed to the wrong product.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
Customer concentration is another essential check. The supplied figures do not identify comparable top-customer percentages for Oracle, AWS, Azure or Google Cloud. Obtain each company’s concentration disclosure and examine whether a small number of AI or database contracts account for a disproportionate share of incremental growth. If one company does not disclose a comparable percentage, mark the field “not stated” rather than assuming diversification.
Balance-sheet risk and capacity commitments
Balance-sheet risk is not captured by operating income. Review cash, debt, lease liabilities, maturities, interest expense, supplier commitments and take-or-pay capacity agreements. Then test a downside case in which AI demand grows more slowly while contracted capacity and depreciation remain fixed.
- Oracle: stress the company’s ability to finance accelerated capacity delivery if the more-than-40% FY2026 total-cloud forecast is delayed.
- AWS: stress the return on its large infrastructure base if utilization or pricing weakens.
- Microsoft: connect Azure growth to Microsoft-wide capital commitments because Azure profitability is not separately disclosed in the cited report.
- Alphabet: separate Google Cloud economics from Alphabet’s broader research and infrastructure commitments; parent-level margins do not eliminate segment-specific execution risk.
Do not rank balance-sheet risk from revenue growth or operating income alone. The ranking requires synchronized net debt, lease and commitment data from the latest filings.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.How to compare valuation when the data are not synchronized
The cited filings do not provide a current, synchronized market-multiple snapshot. A valuation conclusion must therefore be refreshed using share price, diluted shares, cash, debt and the same forecast period for all four companies.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
- Choose one market date and record each closing share price on that date.
- Calculate market capitalization from diluted shares, using the same share-count convention.
- Calculate enterprise value as market capitalization plus debt and lease liabilities, less cash and qualifying investments, using a consistent policy.
- Use matching forward revenue and operating-profit estimates. Do not pair Oracle’s broad total-cloud forecast with AWS’s reported segment sales as if both were the same denominator.
- Calculate forward EV/sales and EV/operating-income multiples, labeling the forecast source and period.
- Calculate free-cash-flow yield as forward free cash flow divided by market capitalization, and state whether free cash flow is company-defined or analyst-adjusted.
- Run sensitivity cases for slower cloud growth, higher capital expenditure and lower utilization of AI capacity.
Oracle’s faster projected growth may already be reflected in its share price; AWS’s larger profit pool may command a premium; Azure and Google Cloud may be valued through their parent companies rather than as standalone stocks. Those are hypotheses to test with synchronized multiples, not conclusions that can be established from the supplied operating figures alone.
Best Value
- It can be a gift option
- Comes with secure packaging
- Helpful in various ways
A practical ranking framework for investors
| Dimension | Current evidence-based read | How to complete the ranking |
|---|---|---|
| Cloud growth | Azure’s disclosed 34% is the highest headline percentage; Oracle reports 16% growth for infrastructure cloud services and license support and forecasts more than 40% total-cloud growth for FY2026; AWS grew 20%; Google Cloud’s supplied scale figure is a run rate rather than a growth rate. | Recalculate on matching fiscal periods and identical scope before declaring a winner. |
| Segment operating profit | AWS has $45.606 billion; Google Cloud has $13.910 billion; Oracle’s $17.7 billion is company-wide; Azure’s comparable line is not stated. | Use segment margins only where both revenue and operating income share the same scope. |
| Capital intensity | All four require substantial infrastructure investment; AWS’s scale and Oracle’s capacity push make spending especially important to monitor. | Compare capex, depreciation, commitments and revenue added per dollar of new capacity. |
| Free cash flow | No synchronized figures are supplied. | Use one company definition and one period; test AI-spending scenarios. |
| Balance-sheet risk | No synchronized net-debt or commitment ranking is supplied. | Review debt, leases, maturities, supplier commitments and downside utilization. |
| AI capacity | No comparable accelerator or power-capacity data are supplied. | Rank execution, supply access, utilization and returns, not marketing claims. |
| Customer concentration | No comparable concentration percentages are supplied. | Use disclosed top-customer exposure and identify dependence on large AI or database contracts. |
| Valuation | No current synchronized market snapshot is supplied. | Refresh price, market cap, enterprise value, forward EV/sales, EV/operating income and free-cash-flow yield on one date. |
Which stock fits which investment question?
“Is Oracle cloud a better stock than AWS?”
That depends on whether you are being paid for faster potential growth or buying the established profit pool. Oracle offers a smaller base, a database-led multicloud strategy and an aggressive total-cloud forecast, but that forecast depends on capacity delivery and customer demand. AWS offers much greater disclosed scale and $45.606 billion of segment operating income, with heavy infrastructure investment. Compare the price you pay for each company’s incremental growth and cash generation rather than choosing on cloud growth alone.
“How does OCI compare with Azure and Google Cloud?”
OCI should be compared with workload fit, database placement, region availability, service breadth, migration friction and economics. Oracle’s reported $24.646 billion combines infrastructure cloud services and license support, while Azure’s 34% figure covers Azure and other cloud services and Google Cloud’s supplied $70 billion-plus figure is an annual run rate. Those measures establish strategic direction, not a clean market-share league table.
“Which cloud company has the best growth and margins?”
Azure has the highest supplied headline growth rate at 34%, AWS has the largest disclosed operating-profit dollar figure, and Google Cloud showed a large year-over-year increase in operating income. Oracle’s available profit figure is company-wide. There is no single defensible winner until segment scope, fiscal period and margin denominator are aligned.
“Is Oracle’s AI infrastructure growth already priced in?”
The operating data cannot answer a market-pricing question by themselves. Compare Oracle’s refreshed forward EV/sales, EV/operating-income and free-cash-flow yield with the assumptions embedded in its more-than-40% FY2026 total-cloud forecast. Then test what happens if capacity arrives late, demand is lower or capital spending remains elevated.
Common comparison mistakes to avoid
- Calling Oracle’s $24.646 billion an OCI-only number when it includes license support.
- Comparing a fiscal-year percentage with a calendar-year percentage without labeling the mismatch.
- Using Oracle’s $17.7 billion company-wide operating income as a cloud margin.
- Creating an Azure operating margin from Microsoft-wide figures.
- Treating Google Cloud’s above-$70-billion annual run rate as full-year revenue.
- Annualizing the 115% quarter-to-quarter multicloud database increase quoted by Larry Ellison.
- Ranking AI capacity from revenue growth without examining capex, supply, power, utilization and depreciation.
- Declaring a valuation winner without using one market date and matching forward estimates.
Bottom line for a cloud-stock comparison
Use Oracle as the higher-growth, smaller-scale case; AWS as the scale-and-profit benchmark; Azure as a high-growth business whose segment margin is not separately disclosed in the cited report; and Google Cloud as a growing platform with sharply improved reported operating income. The best investment is the company whose growth, capital requirements, balance-sheet risk and valuation are most favorable together—not the company with the fastest isolated percentage.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
