Asset Management
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
NMFC vs GBDC
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Asset Management
NMFC vs GBDC — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Asset Management | Asset Management |
| Market Cap | $806M | $3.47B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $370M | $871M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-58M | $205M |
| Gross Margin | 83.6% | 81.5% |
| Operating Margin | 38.0% | 78.9% |
| Forward P/E | 7.7x | 9.3x |
| Total Debt | $1.67B | $4.90B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $81M | $24M |
NMFC vs GBDC — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| New Mountain Financ… (NMFC) | 100 | 89.8 | -10.2% |
| Golub Capital BDC, … (GBDC) | 100 | 109.6 | +9.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NMFC vs GBDC
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NMFC is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.59, yield 13.1%
- 76.4% 10Y total return vs GBDC's 61.2%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.59, current ratio 0.57x
GBDC carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 42.5%, EPS growth 4.4%
- 42.5% NII/revenue growth vs NMFC's 12.3%
- Efficiency ratio 0.0% vs NMFC's 0.5% (lower = leaner)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 42.5% NII/revenue growth vs NMFC's 12.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.7x vs 9.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.0% vs NMFC's 0.5% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.59 vs GBDC's 0.64 | |
| Dividends | 13.1% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs GBDC's 10.4% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +4.4% vs NMFC's -3.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.0% vs NMFC's 0.5% |
NMFC vs GBDC — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
GBDC leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
GBDC is the larger business by revenue, generating $871M annually — 2.4x NMFC's $370M. GBDC is the more profitable business, keeping 43.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NMFC's 4.5%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $370M | $871M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $83M | $431M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$58M | $205M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $676M | $313M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +83.6% | +81.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +38.0% | +78.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +4.5% | +43.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +102.4% | -13.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -3.3% | -160.0% |
Valuation Metrics
NMFC leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 9.4x trailing earnings, GBDC trades at a 85% valuation discount to NMFC's 60.9x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, NMFC's 7.9x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than GBDC's 12.1x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $806M | $3.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.4B | $8.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 60.93x | 9.37x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 7.67x | 9.26x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.30x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 7.90x | 12.14x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.18x | 3.98x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.87x | 0.89x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 2.13x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
GBDC leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
GBDC delivers a 5.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $5 in annual profit, vs $-5 for NMFC. GBDC carries lower financial leverage with a 1.23x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NMFC's 1.41x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), NMFC scores 6/9 vs GBDC's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -4.8% | +5.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -2.0% | +2.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +3.5% | +5.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +4.8% | +7.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.41x | 1.23x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.6B | $4.9B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $81M | $24M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.7B | $4.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.00x | 1.62x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
GBDC leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in GBDC five years ago would be worth $13,353 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $11,637 for NMFC. Over the past 12 months, GBDC leads with a +4.4% total return vs NMFC's -3.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors GBDC at 10.9% vs NMFC's 2.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -4.0% | +0.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -3.4% | +4.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +8.8% | +36.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +16.4% | +33.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +76.4% | +61.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +2.9% | +10.9% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — NMFC and GBDC each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
NMFC is the less volatile stock with a 0.59 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than GBDC's 0.64 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. GBDC currently trades 85.2% from its 52-week high vs NMFC's 77.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.59x | 0.64x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $11.04 | $15.63 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $7.47 | $11.77 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +77.3% | +85.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 56.1 | 55.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.2M | 2.4M |
Analyst Outlook
NMFC leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates NMFC as "Hold" and GBDC as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 23.1% upside for NMFC (target: $11) vs 7.7% for GBDC (target: $14). For income investors, NMFC offers the higher dividend yield at 13.14% vs GBDC's 10.40%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $10.50 | $14.33 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 12 | 11 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +13.1% | +10.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.12 | $1.38 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +6.4% | +2.2% |
GBDC leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). NMFC leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
NMFC vs GBDC: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NMFC or GBDC a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Golub Capital BDC, Inc.
(GBDC) is the stronger pick with 42. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 12. 3% for New Mountain Finance Corporation (NMFC). Golub Capital BDC, Inc. (GBDC) offers the better valuation at 9. 4x trailing P/E (9. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Golub Capital BDC, Inc. (GBDC) a "Buy" — based on 11 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 — NMFC or GBDC?
On trailing P/E, Golub Capital BDC, Inc.
(GBDC) is the cheapest at 9. 4x versus New Mountain Finance Corporation at 60. 9x. On forward P/E, New Mountain Finance Corporation is actually cheaper at 7. 7x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — NMFC or GBDC?
Over the past 5 years, Golub Capital BDC, Inc.
(GBDC) delivered a total return of +33. 5%, compared to +16. 4% for New Mountain Finance Corporation (NMFC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NMFC returned +76. 4% versus GBDC's +61. 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 — NMFC or GBDC?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), New Mountain Finance Corporation (NMFC) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
59β versus Golub Capital BDC, Inc. 's 0. 64β — meaning GBDC is approximately 8% more volatile than NMFC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Golub Capital BDC, Inc. (GBDC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 123% versus 141% for New Mountain Finance Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — NMFC or GBDC?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Golub Capital BDC, Inc.
(GBDC) is pulling ahead at 42. 5% versus 12. 3% for New Mountain Finance Corporation (NMFC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Golub Capital BDC, Inc. grew EPS 4. 4% year-over-year, compared to -86. 4% for New Mountain Finance 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 — NMFC or GBDC?
Golub Capital BDC, Inc.
(GBDC) is the more profitable company, earning 43. 2% net margin versus 4. 5% for New Mountain Finance Corporation — meaning it keeps 43. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: GBDC leads at 78. 9% versus 38. 0% for NMFC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NMFC leads at 83. 6%, 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 NMFC or GBDC more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, New Mountain Finance Corporation (NMFC) trades at 7.
7x forward P/E versus 9. 3x for Golub Capital BDC, Inc. — 1. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for NMFC: 23. 1% to $10. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — NMFC or GBDC?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
New Mountain Finance Corporation (NMFC) offers the highest yield at 13. 1%, versus 10. 4% for Golub Capital BDC, Inc. (GBDC).
09Is NMFC or GBDC better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, New Mountain Finance Corporation (NMFC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
59), 13. 1% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (NMFC: +76. 4%, GBDC: +61. 2%), 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 NMFC and GBDC?
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: NMFC is a small-cap income-oriented stock; GBDC 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 both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.