WHF
WhiteHorse Finance, Inc.
Asset Management
Market Cap$169M
5Y Perf.-22.1%
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Try these comparisons:
Stock Comparison
WHF vs PFLT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
PFLT
PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd.
Asset Management
Market Cap$914M
5Y Perf.+10.7%
WHF vs PFLT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | WHF | PFLT |
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Asset Management | Asset Management |
| Market Cap | $169M | $914M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $38M | $172M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $14M | $34M |
| Gross Margin | 52.3% | 45.6% |
| Operating Margin | 100.9% | 39.4% |
| Forward P/E | 7.0x | 8.2x |
| Total Debt | $324M | $1.78B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $29M | $123M |
WHF vs PFLT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
WHF
PFLT
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| WhiteHorse Finance,… (WHF) | 100 | 77.9 | -22.1% |
| PennantPark Floatin… (PFLT) | 100 | 110.7 | +10.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: WHF vs PFLT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Bottom line: WHF leads in 5 of 7 categories, making it the strongest pick for growth and revenue expansion and valuation and capital efficiency. PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd. is the stronger pick specifically for profitability and margin quality and recent price momentum and sentiment. As sector peers, any of these can serve as alternatives in the same allocation.
WHF
WhiteHorse Finance, Inc.
The Banking Pick
WHF carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.47, yield 20.8%
- Rev growth 121.6%, EPS growth 31.9%
- 123.0% 10Y total return vs PFLT's 77.8%
Best for: income & stability and growth exposure
PFLT
PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd.
The Banking Pick
PFLT is the clearest fit if your priority is bank quality.
- NIM 5.0% vs WHF's 4.9%
- 38.7% margin vs WHF's 37.8%
- +3.7% vs WHF's -5.5%
Best for: bank quality
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | WHF | 121.6% NII/revenue growth vs PFLT's 2.2% |
| Value | WHF | Lower P/E (7.0x vs 8.2x) |
| Quality / Margins | PFLT | 38.7% margin vs WHF's 37.8% |
| Stability / Safety | WHF | Beta 0.47 vs PFLT's 0.79, lower leverage |
| Dividends | WHF | 20.8% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs PFLT's 13.1% |
| Momentum (1Y) | PFLT | +3.7% vs WHF's -5.5% |
| Efficiency (ROA) | WHF | 2.2% ROA vs PFLT's 1.3%, ROIC 4.7% vs 2.1% |
WHF vs PFLT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
BEST OVERALLWHFLAGGINGPFLT
PFLTPennantPark Floating …
1leads
WHFWhiteHorse Finance, I…
3leads
6 Total Categories
CATEGORYLEADERvs PFLTMETRICS WON
Income & Cash FlowRevenue, margins, and cash flow strength
WHF3/5
Valuation MetricsMultiples, price ratios, and targets
WHF6/6
Profitability & EfficiencyROE, ROIC, leverage, and quality scores
WHF9/9
Total Returns1Y, 3Y, 5Y total returns with dividends
PFLT4/6
Risk & VolatilityBeta, volatility, and downside exposure
Tied
—
Analyst OutlookRatings, price targets, and dividends
Tied
—
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
WHF leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
PFLT is the larger business by revenue, generating $172M annually — 4.5x WHF's $38M. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from 38.7% (PFLT) to 37.8% (WHF).
| Metric | WHFWhiteHorse Financ… | PFLTPennantPark Float… |
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $38M | $172M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $0 | $36M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $14M | $34M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $29M | $100M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +52.3% | +45.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +100.9% | +39.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +37.8% | +38.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +50.9% | +55.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +111.8% | -110.3% |
WHF leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
WHF leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 12.3x trailing earnings, WHF trades at a 4% valuation discount to PFLT's 12.8x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, WHF's 12.4x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than PFLT's 38.0x.
| Metric | WHFWhiteHorse Financ… | PFLTPennantPark Float… |
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $169M | $914M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $463M | $2.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 12.26x | 12.79x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 7.00x | 8.16x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.44x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 12.37x | 38.04x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 4.46x | 5.33x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.68x | 0.79x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 8.76x | 9.62x |
WHF leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
WHF leads this category, winning 9 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
WHF delivers a 5.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $5 in annual profit, vs $3 for PFLT. WHF carries lower financial leverage with a 1.25x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to PFLT's 1.65x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), WHF scores 7/9 vs PFLT's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | WHFWhiteHorse Financ… | PFLTPennantPark Float… |
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +5.3% | +3.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +2.2% | +1.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +4.7% | +2.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +6.5% | +2.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.25x | 1.65x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $295M | $1.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $29M | $123M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $324M | $1.8B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.62x | 0.36x |
WHF leads this category, winning 9 of 9 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
PFLT leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in PFLT five years ago would be worth $11,941 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $9,906 for WHF. Over the past 12 months, PFLT leads with a +3.7% total return vs WHF's -5.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors PFLT at 6.5% vs WHF's 2.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | WHFWhiteHorse Financ… | PFLTPennantPark Float… |
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +12.4% | +2.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -5.5% | +3.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +9.0% | +20.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -0.9% | +19.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +123.0% | +77.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +2.9% | +6.5% |
PFLT leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — WHF and PFLT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
WHF is the less volatile stock with a 0.47 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than PFLT's 0.79 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. PFLT currently trades 84.7% from its 52-week high vs WHF's 78.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | WHFWhiteHorse Financ… | PFLTPennantPark Float… |
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.47x | 0.79x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $9.66 | $10.88 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $6.07 | $7.68 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +78.7% | +84.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 53.3 | 66.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 105K | 984K |
Evenly matched — WHF and PFLT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — WHF and PFLT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates WHF as "Hold" and PFLT as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 57.9% upside for WHF (target: $12) vs 14.0% for PFLT (target: $11). For income investors, WHF offers the higher dividend yield at 20.79% vs PFLT's 13.09%.
| Metric | WHFWhiteHorse Financ… | PFLTPennantPark Float… |
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $12.00 | $10.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 18 | 11 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +20.8% | +13.1% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 3 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.58 | $1.21 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +4.4% | 0.0% |
Evenly matched — WHF and PFLT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Key Takeaway
WHF leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). PFLT leads in 1 (Total Returns). 2 tied.
Best OverallWhiteHorse Finance, Inc. (WHF)Leads 3 of 6 categories
Loading custom metrics...
WHF vs PFLT: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is WHF or PFLT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, WhiteHorse Finance, Inc.
(WHF) is the stronger pick with 121. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 2. 2% for PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd. (PFLT). WhiteHorse Finance, Inc. (WHF) offers the better valuation at 12. 3x trailing P/E (7. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd. (PFLT) 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 — WHF or PFLT?
On trailing P/E, WhiteHorse Finance, Inc.
(WHF) is the cheapest at 12. 3x versus PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd. at 12. 8x. On forward P/E, WhiteHorse Finance, Inc. is actually cheaper at 7. 0x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — WHF or PFLT?
Over the past 5 years, PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd.
(PFLT) delivered a total return of +19. 4%, compared to -0. 9% for WhiteHorse Finance, Inc. (WHF). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: WHF returned +123. 0% versus PFLT's +77. 8%. 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 — WHF or PFLT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), WhiteHorse Finance, Inc.
(WHF) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 47β versus PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd. 's 0. 79β — meaning PFLT is approximately 68% more volatile than WHF relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, WhiteHorse Finance, Inc. (WHF) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 125% versus 165% for PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — WHF or PFLT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), WhiteHorse Finance, Inc.
(WHF) is pulling ahead at 121. 6% versus 2. 2% for PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd. (PFLT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: WhiteHorse Finance, Inc. grew EPS 31. 9% year-over-year, compared to -48. 6% for PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd.. 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 — WHF or PFLT?
PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd.
(PFLT) is the more profitable company, earning 38. 7% net margin versus 37. 8% for WhiteHorse Finance, Inc. — meaning it keeps 38. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: WHF leads at 100. 9% versus 39. 4% for PFLT. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — WHF leads at 52. 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 WHF or PFLT more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, WhiteHorse Finance, Inc.
(WHF) trades at 7. 0x forward P/E versus 8. 2x for PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd. — 1. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for WHF: 57. 9% to $12. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — WHF or PFLT?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
WhiteHorse Finance, Inc. (WHF) offers the highest yield at 20. 8%, versus 13. 1% for PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd. (PFLT).
09Is WHF or PFLT better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, WhiteHorse Finance, Inc.
(WHF) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 47), 20. 8% yield, +123. 0% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (WHF: +123. 0%, PFLT: +77. 8%), 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 WHF and PFLT?
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: WHF is a small-cap high-growth stock; PFLT is a small-cap deep-value 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.
Revenue Growth>
%
(WHF: 121.6% · PFLT: 2.2%)Net Margin>
%
(WHF: 37.8% · PFLT: 38.7%)P/E Ratio<
x
(WHF: 12.3x · PFLT: 12.8x)You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.