Shell Companies
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
CAEP vs GS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Capital Markets
CAEP vs GS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Shell Companies | Financial - Capital Markets |
| Market Cap | $280M | $290.92B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $126.85B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-148K | $16.67B |
| Gross Margin | — | 41.1% |
| Operating Margin | — | 14.5% |
| Forward P/E | — | 15.8x |
| Total Debt | $71K | $616.93B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $0.00 | $182.09B |
CAEP vs GS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 25 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cantor Equity Partn… (CAEP) | 100 | 104.0 | +4.0% |
| The Goldman Sachs G… (GS) | 100 | 132.3 | +32.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CAEP vs GS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
In this particular matchup, CAEP is outpaced on most metrics by others in the set.
GS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding.
- 5.4% 10Y total return vs CAEP's 4.5%
- 1.4% yield; 12-year raise streak; the other pay no meaningful dividend
- +68.3% vs CAEP's +4.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Dividends | 1.4% yield; 12-year raise streak; the other pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +68.3% vs CAEP's +4.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 0.9% ROA vs CAEP's -0.1% |
CAEP vs GS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
CAEP vs GS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
GS and CAEP operate at a comparable scale, with $126.9B and $0 in trailing revenue.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $126.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$148,156 | $23.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$148,156 | $16.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$100,976 | $15.8B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +41.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | +14.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | +11.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | -12.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +45.8% |
Valuation Metrics
CAEP leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $280M | $290.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $280M | $725.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -4570.83x | 23.10x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 15.79x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.65x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 34.91x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 2.29x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 2.56x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — CAEP and GS each lead in 2 of 4 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), GS scores 4/9 vs CAEP's 2/9, reflecting mixed financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | +12.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -0.1% | +0.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | +1.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | — | +3.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 5.06x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $70,540 | $434.8B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $0 | $182.1B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $70,540 | $616.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 0.31x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
GS leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in GS five years ago would be worth $26,886 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $10,448 for CAEP. Over the past 12 months, GS leads with a +68.3% total return vs CAEP's +4.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors GS at 44.0% vs CAEP's 1.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +7.4% | +2.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +4.5% | +68.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +4.5% | +198.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +4.5% | +168.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +4.5% | +541.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +1.5% | +44.0% |
Risk & Volatility
CAEP leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CAEP is the less volatile stock with a -0.01 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than GS's 1.47 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CAEP currently trades 98.9% from its 52-week high vs GS's 95.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -0.01x | 1.47x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $11.09 | $984.70 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $10.13 | $558.21 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +98.9% | +95.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 72.3 | 55.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 167K | 2.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
GS is the only dividend payer here at 1.44% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $980.78 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 55 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 12 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $13.48 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +3.5% |
CAEP leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Risk & Volatility). GS leads in 1 (Total Returns). 1 tied.
CAEP vs GS: Frequently Asked Questions
7 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CAEP or GS a better buy right now?
The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
(GS) offers the better valuation at 23. 1x trailing P/E (15. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS) a "Hold" — based on 55 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which is the better long-term investment — CAEP or GS?
Over the past 5 years, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
(GS) delivered a total return of +168. 9%, compared to +4. 5% for Cantor Equity Partners III, Inc. Class A Ordinary Shares (CAEP). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GS returned +541. 0% versus CAEP's +4. 5%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — CAEP or GS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Cantor Equity Partners III, Inc.
Class A Ordinary Shares (CAEP) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 01β versus The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. 's 1. 47β — meaning GS is approximately -29436% more volatile than CAEP relative to the S&P 500.
04Which has better profit margins — CAEP or GS?
The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
(GS) is the more profitable company, earning 11. 3% net margin versus 0. 0% for Cantor Equity Partners III, Inc. Class A Ordinary Shares — meaning it keeps 11. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: GS leads at 14. 5% versus 0. 0% for CAEP. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — GS leads at 41. 1%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
05Which pays a better dividend — CAEP or GS?
In this comparison, GS (1.
4% yield) pays a dividend. CAEP does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
06Is CAEP or GS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Cantor Equity Partners III, Inc.
Class A Ordinary Shares (CAEP) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 01)). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CAEP: +4. 5%, GS: +541. 0%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
07What are the main differences between CAEP and GS?
Both stocks operate in the Financial Services sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: CAEP is a small-cap quality compounder stock; GS is a large-cap high-growth stock. GS pays a dividend while CAEP does not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.