Shell Companies
Compare Stocks
3 / 10Stock Comparison
CUBWU vs ACIC vs GS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Insurance - Property & Casualty
Financial - Capital Markets
CUBWU vs ACIC vs GS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Shell Companies | Insurance - Property & Casualty | Financial - Capital Markets |
| Market Cap | $82M | $525M | $287.62B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $335M | $126.85B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $9M | $107M | $16.67B |
| Gross Margin | — | 63.8% | 41.1% |
| Operating Margin | — | 42.6% | 14.5% |
| Forward P/E | 43.0x | 7.3x | 15.6x |
| Total Debt | $0.00 | $152M | $616.93B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $891K | $199M | $182.09B |
CUBWU vs ACIC vs GS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 24 | Apr 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lionheart Holdings … (CUBWU) | 100 | 107.6 | +7.6% |
| American Coastal In… (ACIC) | 100 | 112.8 | +12.8% |
| The Goldman Sachs G… (GS) | 100 | 204.2 | +104.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CUBWU vs ACIC vs GS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CUBWU is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.09, current ratio 12.25x
- Beta 0.09, current ratio 12.25x
- Beta 0.09 vs GS's 1.47
ACIC has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in value and quality.
- Lower P/E (7.3x vs 15.6x)
- 31.9% margin vs GS's 11.3%
- 9.0% ROA vs GS's 0.9%, ROIC 41.0% vs 1.9%
GS is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 12 yrs, beta 1.47, yield 1.5%
- Rev growth 17.0%, EPS growth 77.3%
- 5.3% 10Y total return vs CUBWU's 7.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 17.0% NII/revenue growth vs ACIC's 13.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.3x vs 15.6x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 31.9% margin vs GS's 11.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.09 vs GS's 1.47 | |
| Dividends | 1.5% yield; 12-year raise streak; the other 2 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +70.6% vs ACIC's -0.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 9.0% ROA vs GS's 0.9%, ROIC 41.0% vs 1.9% |
CUBWU vs ACIC vs GS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
CUBWU vs ACIC vs GS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 3 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ACIC leads this category, winning 5 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
GS and CUBWU operate at a comparable scale, with $126.9B and $0 in trailing revenue. ACIC is the more profitable business, keeping 31.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to GS's 11.3%.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $335M | $126.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $7M | $154M | $23.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $9M | $107M | $16.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$589,072 | $71M | $15.8B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +63.8% | +41.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | +42.6% | +14.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | +31.9% | +11.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | +21.1% | -12.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +9.3% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -28.6% | +4.3% | +45.8% |
Valuation Metrics
ACIC leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 5.0x trailing earnings, ACIC trades at a 88% valuation discount to CUBWU's 43.0x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, ACIC's 2.9x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than GS's 34.8x.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $82M | $525M | $287.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $82M | $478M | $722.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 43.00x | 5.05x | 22.84x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 7.33x | 15.64x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 1.63x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 13.96x | 2.93x | 34.75x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 1.56x | 2.27x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.09x | 1.70x | 2.53x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 7.40x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
ACIC leads this category, winning 8 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ACIC delivers a 35.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $36 in annual profit, vs $4 for CUBWU. ACIC carries lower financial leverage with a 0.48x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to GS's 5.06x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ACIC scores 6/9 vs CUBWU's 3/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +4.0% | +35.7% | +12.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +3.9% | +9.0% | +0.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | +41.0% | +1.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -0.2% | +26.0% | +3.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.48x | 5.06x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$891,017 | -$46M | $434.8B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $891,017 | $199M | $182.1B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $0 | $152M | $616.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 14.20x | 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 $26,440 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $10,750 for CUBWU. Over the past 12 months, GS leads with a +70.6% total return vs ACIC's -0.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors GS at 43.5% vs CUBWU's 2.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -2.0% | +1.9% | +1.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +2.7% | -0.3% | +70.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +7.5% | +159.1% | +195.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +7.5% | +107.0% | +164.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +7.5% | -22.2% | +534.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +2.4% | +37.3% | +43.5% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CUBWU and GS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CUBWU is the less volatile stock with a 0.09 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. GS currently trades 94.0% from its 52-week high vs ACIC's 83.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.09x | 0.39x | 1.47x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $12.90 | $13.06 | $984.70 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $10.47 | $9.79 | $547.74 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +83.3% | +83.1% | +94.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 47.4 | 31.0 | 59.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 103 | 188K | 2.0M |
Analyst Outlook
GS leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ACIC as "Hold", GS as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 7.6% upside for GS (target: $996) vs -82.5% for ACIC (target: $2). GS is the only dividend payer here at 1.46% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $1.90 | $995.89 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 5 | 55 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +1.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 1 | 12 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $13.48 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +3.5% |
ACIC leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). GS leads in 2 (Total Returns, Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
CUBWU vs ACIC vs GS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CUBWU or ACIC or GS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
(GS) is the stronger pick with 17. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 13. 1% for American Coastal Insurance Corporation (ACIC). American Coastal Insurance Corporation (ACIC) offers the better valuation at 5. 0x trailing P/E (7. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate American Coastal Insurance Corporation (ACIC) a "Hold" — based on 5 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 — CUBWU or ACIC or GS?
On trailing P/E, American Coastal Insurance Corporation (ACIC) is the cheapest at 5.
0x versus Lionheart Holdings Unit at 43. 0x. On forward P/E, American Coastal Insurance Corporation is actually cheaper at 7. 3x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CUBWU or ACIC or GS?
Over the past 5 years, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
(GS) delivered a total return of +164. 4%, compared to +7. 5% for Lionheart Holdings Unit (CUBWU). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GS returned +534. 3% versus ACIC's -22. 2%. 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 — CUBWU or ACIC or GS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Lionheart Holdings Unit (CUBWU) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
09β versus The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. 's 1. 47β — meaning GS is approximately 1561% more volatile than CUBWU relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, American Coastal Insurance Corporation (ACIC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 48% versus 5% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CUBWU or ACIC or GS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
(GS) is pulling ahead at 17. 0% versus 13. 1% for American Coastal Insurance Corporation (ACIC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. grew EPS 77. 3% year-over-year, compared to 40. 5% for American Coastal Insurance Corporation. 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 — CUBWU or ACIC or GS?
American Coastal Insurance Corporation (ACIC) is the more profitable company, earning 31.
8% net margin versus 0. 0% for Lionheart Holdings Unit — meaning it keeps 31. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ACIC leads at 42. 6% versus 0. 0% for CUBWU. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ACIC leads at 86. 3%, 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 CUBWU or ACIC or GS more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, American Coastal Insurance Corporation (ACIC) trades at 7.
3x forward P/E versus 15. 6x for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. — 8. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for GS: 7. 6% to $995. 89.
08Which pays a better dividend — CUBWU or ACIC or GS?
In this comparison, GS (1.
5% yield) pays a dividend. CUBWU, ACIC do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CUBWU or ACIC or GS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Lionheart Holdings Unit (CUBWU) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
09)). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CUBWU: +7. 5%, GS: +534. 3%), 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 CUBWU and ACIC 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: CUBWU is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ACIC is a small-cap deep-value stock; GS is a large-cap high-growth stock. GS pays a dividend while CUBWU, ACIC do 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 all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.