FRGE vs ICE vs CBOE

For growth investors, Cboe Global Markets, Inc.

(CBOE) is the stronger pick with 15. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 7. 5% for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE). Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE) offers the better valuation at 27. 1x trailing P/E (19. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE) a "Buy" — based on 36 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.

On trailing P/E, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.

(ICE) is the cheapest at 27. 1x versus Cboe Global Markets, Inc. at 32. 5x. On forward P/E, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. is actually cheaper at 19. 5x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Cboe Global Markets, Inc. wins at 1. 38x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. 's 2. 19x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.

Over the past 5 years, Cboe Global Markets, Inc.

(CBOE) delivered a total return of +223. 7%, compared to -69. 5% for Forge Global Holdings, Inc. (FRGE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CBOE returned +463. 6% versus FRGE's -70. 9%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Cboe Global Markets, Inc.

(CBOE) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 27β versus Forge Global Holdings, Inc. 's 0. 37β — meaning FRGE is approximately -235% more volatile than CBOE relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Forge Global Holdings, Inc. (FRGE) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 6% versus 70% for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Cboe Global Markets, Inc.

(CBOE) is pulling ahead at 15. 1% versus 7. 5% for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Cboe Global Markets, Inc. grew EPS 44. 5% year-over-year, compared to 20. 7% for Intercontinental Exchange, 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.

Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.

(ICE) is the more profitable company, earning 26. 1% net margin versus -83. 6% for Forge Global Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 26. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ICE leads at 38. 7% versus -103. 7% for FRGE. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ICE leads at 61. 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.

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, Cboe Global Markets, Inc. (CBOE) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 38x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. 's 2. 19x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE) trades at 19. 5x forward P/E versus 27. 0x for Cboe Global Markets, Inc. — 7. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ICE: 25. 3% to $195. 71.

In this comparison, ICE (1.

2% yield), CBOE (0. 8% yield) pay a dividend. FRGE does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Cboe Global Markets, Inc.

(CBOE) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 27), 0. 8% yield, +463. 6% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CBOE: +463. 6%, FRGE: -70. 9%), 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.

These companies operate in different sectors (FRGE (Technology) and ICE (Financial Services) and CBOE (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

In terms of investment character: FRGE is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ICE is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; CBOE is a mid-cap high-growth stock. ICE, CBOE pay a dividend while FRGE 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.