Comprehensive Stock Comparison
Compare TeraWulf Inc. (WULF) vs The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS) Stock
Analyze side-by-side fundamentals, valuation, growth, and profitability to decide which stock is the better buy.
Selected Stocks
Add up to 10 tickers. Use presets or search to get started.
Quick Verdict
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | WULF | 102.3% revenue growth vs GS's 17.0% |
| Quality / Margins | GS | 11.3% net margin vs WULF's -51.7% |
| Stability / Safety | GS | Beta 1.36 vs WULF's 2.58 |
| Dividends | GS | 1.6% yield; 12-year raise streak; WULF pays no meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | WULF | +287.1% vs GS's +40.4% |
| Efficiency (ROA) | GS | 0.9% ROA vs WULF's -23.0%, ROIC 1.9% vs -10.6% |
Who Each Stock Is For
Income & stability
Growth exposure
Long-term compounding (10Y)
Sleep-well-at-night portfolio
Defensive / Recession hedge
Business Model
What each company does and how it makes money
TeraWulf is a bitcoin mining company that develops, owns, and operates large-scale mining facilities in the United States. It generates revenue primarily from bitcoin mining rewards — converting electricity into digital assets — with additional income from hosting services for other miners. The company's competitive advantage lies in its access to low-cost, sustainable energy sources — particularly nuclear and hydroelectric power — which gives it superior mining economics.
Goldman Sachs is a global investment bank and financial services firm that provides investment banking, securities, and investment management services to corporations, governments, and high-net-worth individuals. It generates revenue primarily through investment banking fees (20-25%), trading and market-making in its Global Markets segment (40-45%), and asset management fees from its wealth and investment management divisions (30-35%). The firm's key competitive advantage lies in its elite brand reputation, deep client relationships with the world's largest corporations and governments, and its sophisticated risk management capabilities honed over decades.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Financial Metrics Comparison
Side-by-side fundamentals across 2 stocks. BestLagging
Financial Scorecard
GS leads in 4 of 6 categories (Financial Metrics, Valuation Metrics). WULF leads in 1 (Total Returns). 1 tied.
Financial Metrics (TTM)
GS is the larger business by revenue, generating $126.9B annually — 905.8x WULF's $140M. GS is the more profitable business, keeping 11.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to WULF's -51.7%.
| Metric | WULFTeraWulf Inc. | GSThe Goldman Sachs… |
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $140M | $126.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$72M | $23.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$564M | $16.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$677M | $15.8B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +55.3% | +41.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -54.4% | +14.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -51.7% | +11.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -2.1% | -12.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -17.7% | +45.8% |
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | WULFTeraWulf Inc. | GSThe Goldman Sachs… |
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $7.1B | $267.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $7.3B | $701.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -77.24x | 21.20x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 14.73x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.51x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 33.76x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 50.87x | 2.10x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 23.31x | 2.35x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
GS delivers a 12.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $13 in annual profit, vs $-2 for WULF. WULF carries lower financial leverage with a 2.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to GS's 5.06x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), GS scores 4/9 vs WULF's 3/9, reflecting mixed financial health.
| Metric | WULFTeraWulf Inc. | GSThe Goldman Sachs… |
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -2.3% | +12.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -23.0% | +0.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -10.6% | +1.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -15.9% | +3.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 2.01x | 5.06x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $217M | $434.8B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $274M | $182.1B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $491M | $616.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -27.06x | 0.31x |
Total Returns (with DRIP)
A $10,000 investment in GS five years ago would be worth $27,615 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $21,413 for WULF. Over the past 12 months, WULF leads with a +287.1% total return vs GS's +40.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors WULF at 193.7% vs GS's 36.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | WULFTeraWulf Inc. | GSThe Goldman Sachs… |
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +27.3% | -6.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +287.1% | +40.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +2434.4% | +154.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +114.1% | +176.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +77.6% | +521.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +193.7% | +36.6% |
Risk & Volatility
GS is the less volatile stock with a 1.36 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than WULF's 2.58 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500.
| Metric | WULFTeraWulf Inc. | GSThe Goldman Sachs… |
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.58x | 1.36x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $18.51 | $984.70 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $2.06 | $439.38 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +87.6% | +87.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 64.4 | 52.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 24.9M | 2.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates WULF as "Buy" and GS as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 38.7% upside for WULF (target: $23) vs 8.6% for GS (target: $934). GS is the only dividend payer here at 1.57% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | WULFTeraWulf Inc. | GSThe Goldman Sachs… |
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $22.50 | $933.67 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 11 | 54 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 12 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $13.48 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.7% | +3.8% |
Historical Charts
Charts are rendered on first load. Hover for details.
Chart 1Total Return — 5 Years (Rebased to 100)
| Stock | Mar 20 | Feb 26 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| TeraWulf Inc. (WULF) | 100 | 257.97 | +158.0% |
| The Goldman Sachs G… (GS) | 100 | 465.19 | +365.2% |
The Goldman Sachs G… (GS) returned +176% over 5 years vs TeraWulf Inc. (WULF)'s +114%. A $10,000 investment in GS 5 years ago would be worth $27,615 today (including dividends reinvested).
Chart 2Revenue Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2015 | 2024 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| TeraWulf Inc. (WULF) | $18M | $140M | +697.5% |
| The Goldman Sachs G… (GS) | $39.2B | $126.9B | +223.8% |
TeraWulf Inc.'s revenue grew from $18M (2015) to $140M (2024) — a 25.9% CAGR. The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.'s revenue grew from $39.2B (2015) to $126.9B (2024) — a 13.9% CAGR.
Chart 3Net Margin Trend — 10 Years
| Stock | 2015 | 2024 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| TeraWulf Inc. (WULF) | 0.8% | -51.7% | -6826.7% |
| The Goldman Sachs G… (GS) | 15.5% | 11.3% | -27.5% |
TeraWulf Inc.'s net margin went from 1% (2015) to -52% (2024). The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.'s net margin went from 16% (2015) to 11% (2024).
Chart 4P/E Ratio History — 8 Years
| Stock | 2017 | 2024 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Goldman Sachs G… (GS) | 28.3 | 14.1 | -50.2% |
The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. has traded in a 6x–28x P/E range over 8 years; current trailing P/E is ~21x.
Chart 5EPS Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2015 | 2024 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| TeraWulf Inc. (WULF) | 0.07 | -0.21 | -413.9% |
| The Goldman Sachs G… (GS) | 12.14 | 40.54 | +233.9% |
TeraWulf Inc.'s EPS grew from $0.07 (2015) to $-0.21 (2024) — a NaN% CAGR. The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.'s EPS grew from $12.14 (2015) to $40.54 (2024) — a 14% CAGR.
Chart 6Free Cash Flow — 5 Years
TeraWulf Inc. generated $-292M FCF in 2024 (-120% vs 2021). The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. generated $-15B FCF in 2024 (-1038% vs 2021).
WULF vs GS: Frequently Asked Questions
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is WULF or GS a better buy right now?
The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS) offers the better valuation at 21.2x trailing P/E (14.7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate TeraWulf Inc. (WULF) 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 is the better long-term investment — WULF or GS?
Over the past 5 years, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS) delivered a total return of +176.1%, compared to +114.1% for TeraWulf Inc. (WULF). A $10,000 investment in GS five years ago would be worth approximately $28K today (assuming dividends reinvested). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GS returned +521.2% versus WULF's +77.6%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — WULF or GS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS) is the lower-risk stock at 1.36β versus TeraWulf Inc.'s 2.58β — meaning WULF is approximately 89% more volatile than GS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, TeraWulf Inc. (WULF) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 5% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which has better profit margins — WULF or GS?
The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS) is the more profitable company, earning 11.3% net margin versus -51.7% for TeraWulf Inc. — meaning it keeps 11.3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: GS leads at 14.5% versus -54.4% for WULF. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — WULF leads at 55.3%, 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.
05Is WULF or GS more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for WULF: 38.7% to $22.50.
06Which pays a better dividend — WULF or GS?
In this comparison, GS (1.6% yield) pays a dividend. WULF does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
07Is WULF or GS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (1.6% yield, +521.2% 10Y return). TeraWulf Inc. (WULF) carries a higher beta of 2.58 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (GS: +521.2%, WULF: +77.6%), 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.
08What are the main differences between WULF 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. GS pays a dividend while WULF 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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that beat both.