Alphabet and Meta are both growing quickly, but the June quarter tells a different story about the profit and cash left over. Alphabet's operating profit rose faster than revenue. Meta's revenue rose faster than Alphabet's, while its operating profit fell. Their infrastructure spending then absorbed most or all of quarterly operating cash generation.
This comparison uses the same quarter ended June 30, 2026, and October 15 completed regular-session closes for the charts and trailing valuation references. It does not mix today's intraday prices with yesterday's moving averages.
Growth is only the first line
Alphabet reported $119.80 billion of quarterly revenue, up 24.23% year over year. Operating income rose 30.38% to $40.77 billion, producing a calculated GAAP operating margin of 34.03%, versus 32.43% a year earlier. Alphabet Q2 results.
Meta reported $60.80 billion of revenue, up 27.96%. Operating income fell 8.15% to $18.78 billion, leaving a 30.88% GAAP margin versus 43.02% a year earlier. The quarter included $2.40 billion of legal charges and $1.18 billion of severance. These are reported GAAP comparisons; the charges have not been silently removed. Meta Q2 results.
Meta wins the sales-growth comparison. Alphabet wins this quarter's operating-profit growth and reported margin comparisons. Neither observation by itself determines which shares offer the better future return. Alphabet also has advertising exposure through Search and YouTube plus a substantial Cloud business; Meta remains much more concentrated in advertising. They share an investment theme without having identical businesses.
Compare the cash formulas before comparing the totals
Alphabet generated $39.07 billion of operating cash flow and spent $44.92 billion on cash PP&E purchases. Its reported free cash flow was negative $5.86 billion. That company definition does not deduct the additional $0.32 billion of finance-lease principal paid in the quarter.
Meta generated $31.86 billion of operating cash flow. Cash PP&E purchases were $30.12 billion, leaving $1.75 billion before finance-lease principal. Meta then deducts $0.96 billion of that principal in its own free-cash-flow definition, leaving $0.78 billion.
Using an explicitly analytical common boundary of operating cash flow less cash PP&E and finance-lease principal gives approximately negative $6.17 billion for Alphabet and positive $0.78 billion for Meta. Alphabet separately disclosed another $0.20 billion of finance-lease prepayments for leases not yet commenced; that is not included in this common-boundary calculation. These measures also exclude acquisitions and other investing or financing uses. Alphabet Q2 10-Q, Meta Q2 10-Q.
Meta has the better result on that quarter's cash measure. A quarter is not a lifetime verdict: infrastructure purchases can be uneven, and the return on those assets arrives over time. The question for both businesses is whether future operating cash expands enough to justify the spending, rather than whether capex itself signals success.
A low-looking P/E can hide an unusual denominator
Alphabet's four most recently reported quarterly diluted EPS figures sum to $19.91. The October 15 GOOGL close of $349.22 is about 17.54 times that reported trailing EPS. But Q2 alone included approximately $99.03 billion of equity-security gains, primarily unrealized, adding $6.26 to diluted EPS. Earlier quarters also contained investment gains. This is not a clean recurring operating-earnings multiple, and removing only one gain would not produce a sound normalized series.
Meta's reported trailing EPS sum is $26.55. Its October 15 close of $736.72 is about 27.75 times that figure. The denominator includes both a $15.93 billion noncash tax charge in Q3 2025 and an $8.03 billion tax benefit in Q1 2026. Those items pull reported earnings in opposite directions. We therefore do not declare Alphabet the better value simply because 17.54 is below 27.75.
The balance-sheet comparison needs the same care. Alphabet's $242.47 billion of cash, equivalents and marketable securities includes equity holdings, not only spendable cash-like debt instruments. It also raised approximately $49.56 billion of net common and mandatory-convertible preferred proceeds in Q2. Investment gains and outside funding help explain the balance; it should not all be described as cash earned internally by the business.
Two different daily charts
GOOGL's October 15 close was above its 20-, 50- and 200-session averages: $346.86, $344.92 and $340.77. The October 15 intraday low of $340.61 sits near that longer average. On a loss of this group, the surviving September 11 daily gap at $333.23-$335.03 is a lower dated reference. Above the close, the October 15 high was $352.15. These are chart checkpoints, not price forecasts.
META also closed above all three averages, but their spacing differs: $733.60 on the 20-day, $652.85 on the 50-day and $631.76 on the 200-day. Its October 15 range ran from $715.58 to $743.97. The close was only just above the 20-day, while the longer averages were much farther below. A break of the short average would weaken the near-term picture without automatically establishing a break of the much wider trend.
Meta's company-confirmed next report is October 21 after the close. Future reports will test both the spending and profit trajectories. Nothing here assumes that either company's next earnings result has already happened.
Verdict: separate the scorecards
Alphabet has the stronger June-quarter operating-profit trajectory. Meta has faster sales growth and the better same-quarter cash remainder after the specified infrastructure payments. Both charts were above their long averages at the dated close. Reported P/E alone does not resolve the choice because both earnings histories contain large unusual items.
That makes the useful follow-up a repeatable comparison: operating margins, cash after consistently defined infrastructure costs, and the return those investments produce. A company can win one quarter's scorecard and still be the less attractive stock at a different price.
See GOOGL Daily Levels, META Daily Levels and other company comparisons.
This is market research only, not a recommendation to buy or sell.