Education & Training Services
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
AMBO vs TAL vs EDU vs RLX vs LOPE
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Education & Training Services
Education & Training Services
Tobacco
Education & Training Services
AMBO vs TAL vs EDU vs RLX vs LOPE — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Education & Training Services | Education & Training Services | Education & Training Services | Tobacco | Education & Training Services |
| Market Cap | $301K | $771M | $8.97B | $1.96B | $4.46B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $60M | $2.66B | $4.99B | $3.27B | $817M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $12M | $171M | $367M | $764M | $220M |
| Gross Margin | 40.1% | 54.4% | 55.1% | 31.9% | 51.6% |
| Operating Margin | -22.5% | 2.7% | 9.0% | 6.1% | 38.0% |
| Forward P/E | 4.5x | 18.1x | 16.2x | 2.2x | 16.3x |
| Total Debt | $7M | $333M | $804M | $58M | $200M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $831K | $1.77B | $1.61B | $5.59B | $112M |
AMBO vs TAL vs EDU vs RLX vs LOPE — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jan 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ambow Education Hol… (AMBO) | 100 | 8.5 | -91.5% |
| TAL Education Group (TAL) | 100 | 14.8 | -85.2% |
| New Oriental Educat… (EDU) | 100 | 33.6 | -66.4% |
| RLX Technology Inc. (RLX) | 100 | 9.6 | -90.4% |
| Grand Canyon Educat… (LOPE) | 100 | 193.6 | +93.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: AMBO vs TAL vs EDU vs RLX vs LOPE
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
AMBO ranks third and is worth considering specifically for efficiency.
- 77.7% ROA vs TAL's 3.1%, ROIC 0.6% vs -0.3%
TAL is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 51.2%, EPS growth 24.7%, 3Y rev CAGR -20.0%
EDU is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 5 yrs, beta 0.82, yield 1.1%
- 1.1% yield, 5-year raise streak, vs RLX's 0.5%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
RLX carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for sleep-well-at-night and valuation efficiency.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.56, Low D/E 0.4%, current ratio 10.84x
- PEG 0.03 vs LOPE's 2.27
- Beta 0.56, yield 0.5%, current ratio 10.84x
- 96.5% revenue growth vs AMBO's -86.2%
LOPE is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 272.4% 10Y total return vs EDU's 47.3%
- 26.9% margin vs TAL's 6.5%
- Beta 0.35 vs TAL's 0.96
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 96.5% revenue growth vs AMBO's -86.2% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (2.2x vs 16.3x), PEG 0.03 vs 2.27 | |
| Quality / Margins | 26.9% margin vs TAL's 6.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.35 vs TAL's 0.96 | |
| Dividends | 1.1% yield, 5-year raise streak, vs RLX's 0.5%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +25.1% vs AMBO's -36.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 77.7% ROA vs TAL's 3.1%, ROIC 0.6% vs -0.3% |
AMBO vs TAL vs EDU vs RLX vs LOPE — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
AMBO vs TAL vs EDU vs RLX vs LOPE — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
RLX leads in 1 of 6 categories
TAL leads 1 • LOPE leads 1 • EDU leads 1 • AMBO leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
RLX leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
EDU is the larger business by revenue, generating $5.0B annually — 82.7x AMBO's $60M. LOPE is the more profitable business, keeping 26.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to TAL's 6.5%. On growth, RLX holds the edge at +52.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $60M | $2.7B | $5.0B | $3.3B | $817M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$13M | $72M | $563M | $218M | $341M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $12M | $171M | $367M | $764M | $220M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $10M | $441M | $737M | $1.3B | $260M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +40.1% | +54.4% | +55.1% | +31.9% | +51.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -22.5% | +2.7% | +9.0% | +6.1% | +38.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +20.7% | +6.5% | +7.4% | +23.4% | +26.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +16.1% | +16.6% | +14.8% | +39.2% | +31.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +38.7% | +6.1% | +52.2% | -100.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -21.4% | 0.0% | +23.1% | +11.1% |
Valuation Metrics
TAL leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 4.5x trailing earnings, AMBO trades at a 87% valuation discount to RLX's 34.1x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), RLX offers better value at 0.49x vs LOPE's 2.97x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $301,346 | $771M | $9.0B | $2.0B | $4.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $6M | -$667M | $8.2B | $1.1B | $4.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 4.49x | 9.05x | 24.50x | 34.11x | 21.33x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 18.12x | 16.25x | 2.16x | 16.30x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 0.49x | 2.97x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 6.14x | -16.38x | 15.25x | — | 13.25x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.03x | 0.34x | 1.83x | 5.46x | 4.04x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.74x | 0.20x | 2.31x | 1.18x | 6.17x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 2.70x | 14.07x | 15.84x | 18.71x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — AMBO and RLX each lead in 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
AMBO delivers a 71.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $71 in annual profit, vs $5 for TAL. RLX carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to AMBO's 0.79x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), EDU scores 7/9 vs LOPE's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +71.0% | +4.7% | +9.1% | +4.7% | +29.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +77.7% | +3.1% | +4.8% | +4.4% | +21.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +0.6% | -0.3% | +9.9% | -0.7% | +32.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +0.8% | -0.2% | +9.5% | -0.7% | +33.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 7 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.79x | 0.09x | 0.20x | 0.00x | 0.27x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $6M | -$1.6B | -$809M | -$5.5B | $88M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $831,000 | $1.8B | $1.6B | $5.6B | $112M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $7M | $333M | $804M | $58M | $200M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -255.32x | — | 1570.90x | — | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LOPE leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in LOPE five years ago would be worth $17,405 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $872 for AMBO. Over the past 12 months, RLX leads with a +25.1% total return vs AMBO's -36.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors TAL at 26.7% vs AMBO's -2.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -24.5% | -0.8% | -2.5% | -2.8% | -0.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -36.3% | +23.9% | +19.4% | +25.1% | -15.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -8.3% | +103.2% | +37.2% | -2.1% | +47.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -91.3% | -79.7% | -61.5% | -79.3% | +74.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -94.9% | +27.3% | +47.3% | -92.3% | +272.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -2.8% | +26.7% | +11.1% | -0.7% | +13.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — EDU and LOPE each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
LOPE is the less volatile stock with a 0.35 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than TAL's 0.96 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. EDU currently trades 86.7% from its 52-week high vs AMBO's 31.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.91x | 0.96x | 0.82x | 0.56x | 0.35x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $6.75 | $13.37 | $64.97 | $2.84 | $223.04 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.47 | $9.04 | $41.62 | $1.79 | $149.37 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +31.3% | +85.3% | +86.7% | +75.9% | +73.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 44.7 | 52.3 | 54.8 | 52.6 | 44.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 11K | 3.3M | 689K | 2.0M | 244K |
Analyst Outlook
EDU leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: TAL as "Hold", EDU as "Buy", RLX as "Hold", LOPE as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 57.9% upside for TAL (target: $18) vs 10.9% for LOPE (target: $182). For income investors, EDU offers the higher dividend yield at 1.08% vs RLX's 0.47%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $18.00 | $68.00 | — | $182.33 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 28 | 24 | 1 | 18 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +1.1% | +0.5% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 5 | 2 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $0.61 | $0.07 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.7% | +5.0% | +4.4% | +5.9% |
RLX leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). TAL leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
AMBO vs TAL vs EDU vs RLX vs LOPE: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is AMBO or TAL or EDU or RLX or LOPE a better buy right now?
For growth investors, RLX Technology Inc.
(RLX) is the stronger pick with 96. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -86. 2% for Ambow Education Holding Ltd. (AMBO). Ambow Education Holding Ltd. (AMBO) offers the better valuation at 4. 5x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate New Oriental Education & Technology Group Inc. (EDU) a "Buy" — based on 24 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 — AMBO or TAL or EDU or RLX or LOPE?
On trailing P/E, Ambow Education Holding Ltd.
(AMBO) is the cheapest at 4. 5x versus RLX Technology Inc. at 34. 1x. On forward P/E, RLX Technology Inc. is actually cheaper at 2. 2x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: RLX Technology Inc. wins at 0. 03x versus Grand Canyon Education, Inc. 's 2. 27x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — AMBO or TAL or EDU or RLX or LOPE?
Over the past 5 years, Grand Canyon Education, Inc.
(LOPE) delivered a total return of +74. 1%, compared to -91. 3% for Ambow Education Holding Ltd. (AMBO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LOPE returned +272. 4% versus AMBO's -94. 9%. 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 — AMBO or TAL or EDU or RLX or LOPE?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Grand Canyon Education, Inc.
(LOPE) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 35β versus TAL Education Group's 0. 96β — meaning TAL is approximately 171% more volatile than LOPE relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, RLX Technology Inc. (RLX) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 79% for Ambow Education Holding Ltd. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — AMBO or TAL or EDU or RLX or LOPE?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), RLX Technology Inc.
(RLX) is pulling ahead at 96. 5% versus -86. 2% for Ambow Education Holding Ltd. (AMBO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: TAL Education Group grew EPS 24. 7% year-over-year, compared to -97. 0% for Ambow Education Holding Ltd.. Over a 3-year CAGR, EDU leads at 16. 4% annualised revenue growth. 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 — AMBO or TAL or EDU or RLX or LOPE?
RLX Technology Inc.
(RLX) is the more profitable company, earning 22. 6% net margin versus 3. 8% for TAL Education Group — meaning it keeps 22. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LOPE leads at 27. 5% versus -4. 4% for RLX. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — EDU leads at 55. 4%, 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 AMBO or TAL or EDU or RLX or LOPE more undervalued right now?
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, RLX Technology Inc. (RLX) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 03x versus Grand Canyon Education, Inc. 's 2. 27x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, RLX Technology Inc. (RLX) trades at 2. 2x forward P/E versus 18. 1x for TAL Education Group — 16. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for TAL: 57. 9% to $18. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — AMBO or TAL or EDU or RLX or LOPE?
In this comparison, EDU (1.
1% yield), RLX (0. 5% yield) pay a dividend. AMBO, TAL, LOPE do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is AMBO or TAL or EDU or RLX or LOPE better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Grand Canyon Education, Inc.
(LOPE) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 35), +272. 4% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (LOPE: +272. 4%, AMBO: -94. 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.
10What are the main differences between AMBO and TAL and EDU and RLX and LOPE?
Both stocks operate in the Consumer Defensive sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: AMBO is a small-cap deep-value stock; TAL is a small-cap high-growth stock; EDU is a small-cap quality compounder stock; RLX is a small-cap high-growth stock; LOPE is a small-cap quality compounder stock. EDU pays a dividend while AMBO, TAL, RLX, LOPE 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.