Skip to main content
This Board Has Moved

This board has been migrated to our new platform! Check out the new home page at discussion.fool.com or click below to go directly to the new Board on the new site.

Go to the New Site
No. of Recommendations: 16
At first glance, I thought the strange period we're in now made it a bad time to consider Op/Ex:Rev as a factor for our companies because of the pandemic, work from home, etc. (I still do, but I also don't argue with someone with Bear's track record.) Still, these are not exactly normal times by anyone's standards. How that might skew the stats for OpEx, I'm not quite sure, but I think there are things we know, and some that are safe to assume, given proper care.

• Tech employees are in high demand. Almost all tech companies have unfilled job openings.
• For many software companies, the big variable in OpEx is often employee count and employee expense, especially while in hyper-growth mode.
• Macro factors: with the cloud buildout, the pandemic, and worker shortages (especially tech), this would be a poor time to be less than aggressive in hiring new personnel.
• Smart tech companies that are hyper-growing revenue will surely be aggressive in increasing head count, likely aiming considerably above the bare minimum needed.
• For the reasons above, I would personally be concerned about a fast-growing tech company that had a considerable drop right now in Op-EX. (If they know they will have a near-term need for an increasing number of employees, and employees are hard to find, it's time to hire. If they don't think they will have the need, we need to know why.)
• I have wondered for some time, if SaaS companies that have large cash positions, aren't "padding" their tech employee head-count a) for near-term future needs, and b) to keep competitors from scooping up the best talent. Yes, it would be expensive, but the eventual rewards should be huge if the shortage continues or increases.


All this made me wonder if Bear was on the wrong track, so I decided to check out a simple stat for several companies, that is to see how much revenue they were generating per employee. What I found was pretty surprising, and it doesn't come close to disagreeing with the Bear, but many companies I own are also near the bottom. For further meaning in the numbers, I leave it up to each to decide.

It's hard not to notice that many board fav's are near the bottom of the list. Does this mean they're hiring "extra" employees, or are they somehow inefficient? If we have to wait to find out, it could be an expensive waiting period.

What I'm seeing for sure:
• NFLX isn't dead yet.
• It's no wonder AAPL keeps on setting records.
• Never argue with a bear.


		
REVENUE (ttm) PER EMPLOYEE (Mil) Descending Order

Ticker HeadCt Rev/Emp

NFLX 11300 2.69
AAPL 154000 2.51
CELH 225 1.77
GOOGL 163906 1.65
NVDA 22473 1.31
AMD 15500 1.22
MSFT 181000 1.06
ANET 2993 1.05
INTU 13500 0.95
UNH 350000 0.85
SNAP 5661 0.78
BRK.A 372000 0.76
MRVL 6729 0.75
ZM 7155 0.72
ENPH 2260 0.67
UPST 1497 0.67
TTD 1967 0.66
TSLA 99290 0.63
ISRG 9793 0.60
MGNI 876 0.60
SHOP 10000 0.48
AEHR 79 0.48
DOCS 887 0.47
TEAM 6433 0.40
TWLO 8199 0.38
BILL 1384 0.38
DDOG 3200 0.37
MNDY 1064 0.34
SNOW 3992 0.31
ZI 2742 0.30
CRWD 4965 0.29
ZS 3153 0.27
NET 2751 0.27
MDB 3544 0.25
ASAN 1666 0.23
S 1400 0.18
Print the post  

Announcements

READ THIS BEFORE POSTING
Enter text here. Please keep promos short.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.