Asset Management
Compare Stocks
3 / 10Stock Comparison
CNS vs VRTS vs VCTR
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Asset Management
Asset Management
CNS vs VRTS vs VCTR — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Asset Management | Asset Management | Asset Management |
| Market Cap | $3.63B | $949M | $5.36B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $517M | $831M | $1.31B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $164M | $138M | $452M |
| Gross Margin | 46.8% | 74.9% | 71.1% |
| Operating Margin | 33.4% | 17.4% | 42.5% |
| Forward P/E | 20.8x | 5.5x | 12.2x |
| Total Debt | $141M | $2.84B | $970M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $183M | $477M | $164M |
CNS vs VRTS vs VCTR — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cohen & Steers, Inc. (CNS) | 100 | 111.9 | +11.9% |
| Virtus Investment P… (VRTS) | 100 | 152.5 | +52.5% |
| Victory Capital Hol… (VCTR) | 100 | 500.8 | +400.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CNS vs VRTS vs VCTR
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CNS has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.98, Low D/E 24.5%, current ratio 25.39x
- Beta 0.98, yield 3.3%, current ratio 25.39x
- NIM 2.4% vs VRTS's 0.9%
VRTS is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and valuation efficiency.
- Dividend streak 7 yrs, beta 1.14, yield 6.6%
- PEG 0.38 vs CNS's 16.52
- Lower P/E (5.5x vs 20.8x), PEG 0.38 vs 16.52
VCTR is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 46.2%, EPS growth -6.8%
- 6.8% 10Y total return vs CNS's 154.3%
- 46.2% NII/revenue growth vs VRTS's -8.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 46.2% NII/revenue growth vs VRTS's -8.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (5.5x vs 20.8x), PEG 0.38 vs 16.52 | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs VRTS's 0.6% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.98 vs VCTR's 1.32, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 6.6% yield, 7-year raise streak, vs VCTR's 2.3% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +46.1% vs VRTS's -5.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs VRTS's 0.6% |
CNS vs VRTS vs VCTR — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CNS vs VRTS vs VCTR — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 3 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
VCTR leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
VCTR is the larger business by revenue, generating $1.3B annually — 2.5x CNS's $517M. CNS is the more profitable business, keeping 29.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to VRTS's 16.7%.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $517M | $831M | $1.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $198M | $205M | $707M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $164M | $138M | $452M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$94M | -$67M | $422M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +46.8% | +74.9% | +71.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +33.4% | +17.4% | +42.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +29.2% | +16.7% | +25.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +16.4% | -8.9% | +18.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +5.2% | +10.9% | +38.5% |
Valuation Metrics
VRTS leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 7.1x trailing earnings, VRTS trades at a 70% valuation discount to CNS's 23.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), VRTS offers better value at 0.48x vs CNS's 19.03x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $3.6B | $949M | $5.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $3.6B | $3.3B | $6.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 23.94x | 7.10x | 20.51x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 20.79x | 5.55x | 12.24x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 19.03x | 0.48x | 2.84x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 19.48x | 16.20x | 9.82x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 7.01x | 1.14x | 4.10x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 6.30x | 0.95x | 2.29x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 42.64x | — | 22.63x |
Profitability & Efficiency
CNS leads this category, winning 8 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CNS delivers a 28.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $28 in annual profit, vs $14 for VRTS. CNS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.25x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to VRTS's 2.74x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CNS scores 5/9 vs VCTR's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +28.3% | +13.5% | +18.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +20.5% | +3.6% | +10.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +19.2% | +3.0% | +15.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +22.8% | +3.7% | +17.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.25x | 2.74x | 0.40x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$42M | $2.4B | $806M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $183M | $477M | $164M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $141M | $2.8B | $970M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 2.15x | 10.35x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
VCTR leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in VCTR five years ago would be worth $30,385 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,496 for VRTS. Over the past 12 months, VCTR leads with a +46.1% total return vs VRTS's -5.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors VCTR at 43.0% vs VRTS's 0.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +12.9% | -9.8% | +31.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -5.2% | -5.5% | +46.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +44.3% | +0.1% | +192.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +18.2% | -35.0% | +203.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +154.3% | +142.6% | +682.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +13.0% | +0.0% | +43.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CNS and VCTR each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CNS is the less volatile stock with a 0.98 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than VCTR's 1.32 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. VCTR currently trades 94.7% from its 52-week high vs VRTS's 65.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.98x | 1.14x | 1.32x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $83.99 | $215.06 | $88.42 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $58.39 | $121.61 | $57.03 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +84.7% | +65.9% | +94.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 63.1 | 55.4 | 75.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 323K | 101K | 695K |
Analyst Outlook
VRTS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CNS as "Sell", VRTS as "Hold", VCTR as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 15.0% upside for VRTS (target: $163) vs -6.8% for VCTR (target: $78). For income investors, VRTS offers the higher dividend yield at 6.58% vs VCTR's 2.26%.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Sell | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $76.00 | $163.00 | $78.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 13 | 11 | 13 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +3.3% | +6.6% | +2.3% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $2.34 | $9.32 | $1.89 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.6% | +6.3% | +2.7% |
VCTR leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). VRTS leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
CNS vs VRTS vs VCTR: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CNS or VRTS or VCTR a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Victory Capital Holdings, Inc.
(VCTR) is the stronger pick with 46. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -8. 0% for Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. (VRTS). Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. (VRTS) offers the better valuation at 7. 1x trailing P/E (5. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Victory Capital Holdings, Inc. (VCTR) a "Buy" — based on 13 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 has the better valuation — CNS or VRTS or VCTR?
On trailing P/E, Virtus Investment Partners, Inc.
(VRTS) is the cheapest at 7. 1x versus Cohen & Steers, Inc. at 23. 9x. On forward P/E, Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. is actually cheaper at 5. 5x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. wins at 0. 38x versus Cohen & Steers, Inc. 's 16. 52x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CNS or VRTS or VCTR?
Over the past 5 years, Victory Capital Holdings, Inc.
(VCTR) delivered a total return of +203. 8%, compared to -35. 0% for Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. (VRTS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: VCTR returned +682. 9% versus VRTS's +142. 6%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — CNS or VRTS or VCTR?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Cohen & Steers, Inc.
(CNS) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 98β versus Victory Capital Holdings, Inc. 's 1. 32β — meaning VCTR is approximately 34% more volatile than CNS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Cohen & Steers, Inc. (CNS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 25% versus 3% for Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CNS or VRTS or VCTR?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Victory Capital Holdings, Inc.
(VCTR) is pulling ahead at 46. 2% versus -8. 0% for Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. (VRTS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. grew EPS 18. 2% year-over-year, compared to -6. 8% for Victory Capital Holdings, Inc.. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.
06Which has better profit margins — CNS or VRTS or VCTR?
Cohen & Steers, Inc.
(CNS) is the more profitable company, earning 29. 2% net margin versus 16. 7% for Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. — meaning it keeps 29. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: VCTR leads at 42. 5% versus 17. 4% for VRTS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — VRTS leads at 74. 9%, 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.
07Is CNS or VRTS or VCTR more undervalued right now?
The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.
By this metric, Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. (VRTS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 38x versus Cohen & Steers, Inc. 's 16. 52x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. (VRTS) trades at 5. 5x forward P/E versus 20. 8x for Cohen & Steers, Inc. — 15. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for VRTS: 15. 0% to $163. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — CNS or VRTS or VCTR?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. (VRTS) offers the highest yield at 6. 6%, versus 2. 3% for Victory Capital Holdings, Inc. (VCTR).
09Is CNS or VRTS or VCTR better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Victory Capital Holdings, Inc.
(VCTR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (2. 3% yield, +682. 9% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (VCTR: +682. 9%, VRTS: +142. 6%), 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.
10What are the main differences between CNS and VRTS and VCTR?
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: CNS is a small-cap income-oriented stock; VRTS is a small-cap deep-value stock; VCTR is a small-cap high-growth stock. 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 all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.