Shell Companies
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
APXT vs EVR vs GS vs LAZ vs MS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Capital Markets
Financial - Capital Markets
Financial - Capital Markets
Financial - Capital Markets
APXT vs EVR vs GS vs LAZ vs MS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Shell Companies | Financial - Capital Markets | Financial - Capital Markets | Financial - Capital Markets | Financial - Capital Markets |
| Market Cap | $1.94B | $13.11B | $287.62B | $4.36B | $302.59B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $330M | $3.88B | $126.85B | $3.19B | $103.14B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-57M | $592M | $16.67B | $237M | $16.18B |
| Gross Margin | 75.0% | 99.4% | 41.1% | 31.8% | 55.6% |
| Operating Margin | 2.2% | 20.5% | 14.5% | 13.0% | 17.1% |
| Forward P/E | — | 17.8x | 15.8x | 16.2x | 16.2x |
| Total Debt | $10M | $1.16B | $616.93B | $2.58B | $360.49B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $291M | $1.47B | $182.09B | $1.50B | $75.74B |
APXT vs EVR vs GS vs LAZ vs MS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apex Technology Acq… (APXT) | 100 | 102.1 | +2.1% |
| Evercore Inc. (EVR) | 100 | 619.1 | +519.1% |
| The Goldman Sachs G… (GS) | 100 | 476.6 | +376.6% |
| Lazard Ltd (LAZ) | 100 | 179.0 | +79.0% |
| Morgan Stanley (MS) | 100 | 436.7 | +336.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: APXT vs EVR vs GS vs LAZ vs MS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
APXT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.02, Low D/E 3.6%, current ratio 1.77x
- Beta 0.02 vs EVR's 1.90, lower leverage
EVR is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 29.5%, EPS growth 54.7%
- 29.5% NII/revenue growth vs APXT's -198.1%
GS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 1.13 vs MS's 1.82
- Lower P/E (15.8x vs 16.2x), PEG 1.13 vs 1.82
- 1.5% yield, 12-year raise streak, vs LAZ's 3.8%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
- +70.6% vs APXT's +0.8%
LAZ is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if defensive is your priority.
- Beta 1.79, yield 3.8%, current ratio 29.35x
- Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs EVR's 0.8% (lower = leaner)
- Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs EVR's 0.8%
MS is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 11 yrs, beta 1.37, yield 2.0%
- 7.3% 10Y total return vs GS's 5.3%
- NIM 0.7% vs GS's 0.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 29.5% NII/revenue growth vs APXT's -198.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (15.8x vs 16.2x), PEG 1.13 vs 1.82 | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs EVR's 0.8% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.02 vs EVR's 1.90, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.5% yield, 12-year raise streak, vs LAZ's 3.8%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +70.6% vs APXT's +0.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs EVR's 0.8% |
APXT vs EVR vs GS vs LAZ vs MS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
APXT vs EVR vs GS vs LAZ vs MS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
EVR leads in 2 of 6 categories
APXT leads 1 • GS leads 0 • LAZ leads 0 • MS leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
EVR leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
GS is the larger business by revenue, generating $126.9B annually — 383.8x APXT's $330M. EVR is the more profitable business, keeping 15.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to APXT's -8.8%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $330M | $3.9B | $126.9B | $3.2B | $103.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $9M | $804M | $23.4B | $384M | $26.3B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$57M | $592M | $16.7B | $237M | $16.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $139M | $1.2B | $15.8B | $519M | -$6.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +75.0% | +99.4% | +41.1% | +31.8% | +55.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +2.2% | +20.5% | +14.5% | +13.0% | +17.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -8.8% | +15.3% | +11.3% | +7.4% | +13.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +26.0% | +30.5% | -12.1% | +15.9% | -2.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +5.0% | +44.2% | +45.8% | -43.8% | +48.9% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — GS and LAZ each lead in 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 21.4x trailing earnings, LAZ trades at a 11% valuation discount to MS's 23.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), GS offers better value at 1.63x vs MS's 2.69x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.9B | $13.1B | $287.6B | $4.4B | $302.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.7B | $12.8B | $722.5B | $5.4B | $587.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -62.50x | 23.56x | 22.84x | 21.40x | 23.92x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 17.78x | 15.79x | 16.18x | 16.24x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.08x | 1.63x | — | 2.69x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 231.63x | 15.91x | 34.75x | 12.09x | 25.81x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 5.87x | 3.38x | 2.27x | 1.37x | 2.93x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 6.74x | 6.33x | 2.53x | 4.99x | 2.91x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 22.61x | 11.09x | — | 8.63x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
EVR leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
EVR delivers a 29.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $29 in annual profit, vs $-12 for APXT. APXT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.04x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to GS's 5.06x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), APXT scores 6/9 vs GS's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -12.2% | +29.3% | +12.6% | +26.7% | +14.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -7.7% | +14.1% | +0.9% | +5.2% | +1.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +1.7% | +18.8% | +1.9% | +9.5% | +2.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +2.2% | +17.6% | +3.6% | +9.5% | +3.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 5 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.04x | 0.50x | 5.06x | 2.61x | 3.42x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$281M | -$311M | $434.8B | $1.1B | $284.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $291M | $1.5B | $182.1B | $1.5B | $75.7B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $10M | $1.2B | $616.9B | $2.6B | $360.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.65x | 32.72x | 0.31x | 4.74x | 0.44x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — EVR and GS and MS each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in GS five years ago would be worth $26,440 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $9,852 for APXT. Over the past 12 months, GS leads with a +70.6% total return vs APXT's +0.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors EVR at 46.8% vs APXT's 0.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +1.1% | -5.5% | +1.8% | -5.6% | +5.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +0.8% | +60.9% | +70.6% | +17.8% | +63.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +0.8% | +216.3% | +195.2% | +80.2% | +138.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -1.5% | +136.2% | +164.4% | +20.6% | +136.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +2.2% | +613.3% | +534.3% | +100.4% | +732.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +0.3% | +46.8% | +43.5% | +21.7% | +33.6% |
Risk & Volatility
APXT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
APXT is the less volatile stock with a 0.02 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than EVR's 1.90 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. APXT currently trades 100.0% from its 52-week high vs LAZ's 79.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.02x | 1.88x | 1.47x | 1.78x | 1.36x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $10.01 | $388.71 | $984.70 | $58.75 | $194.83 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $9.87 | $206.63 | $547.74 | $38.67 | $118.20 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +100.0% | +85.2% | +94.0% | +79.0% | +97.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 54.2 | 53.0 | 59.5 | 50.9 | 66.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 52K | 622K | 2.0M | 1.5M | 5.4M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — GS and LAZ each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: EVR as "Buy", GS as "Hold", LAZ as "Buy", MS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 15.6% upside for EVR (target: $383) vs 4.4% for LAZ (target: $49). For income investors, LAZ offers the higher dividend yield at 3.78% vs EVR's 0.98%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $382.67 | $980.78 | $48.50 | $203.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 21 | 55 | 29 | 52 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.0% | +1.5% | +3.8% | +2.0% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 12 | 1 | 11 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $3.25 | $13.48 | $1.75 | $3.81 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.7% | +5.0% | +3.5% | +2.1% | +1.4% |
EVR leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). APXT leads in 1 (Risk & Volatility). 3 tied.
APXT vs EVR vs GS vs LAZ vs MS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is APXT or EVR or GS or LAZ or MS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Evercore Inc.
(EVR) is the stronger pick with 29. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 2% for Lazard Ltd (LAZ). Lazard Ltd (LAZ) offers the better valuation at 21. 4x trailing P/E (16. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Evercore Inc. (EVR) a "Buy" — based on 21 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 — APXT or EVR or GS or LAZ or MS?
On trailing P/E, Lazard Ltd (LAZ) is the cheapest at 21.
4x versus Morgan Stanley at 23. 9x. On forward P/E, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. is actually cheaper at 15. 8x — 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: The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. wins at 1. 13x versus Morgan Stanley's 1. 82x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — APXT or EVR or GS or LAZ or MS?
Over the past 5 years, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
(GS) delivered a total return of +164. 4%, compared to -1. 5% for Apex Technology Acquisition Corporation (APXT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MS returned +743. 3% versus APXT's +2. 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 — APXT or EVR or GS or LAZ or MS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Apex Technology Acquisition Corporation (APXT) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
02β versus Evercore Inc. 's 1. 88β — meaning EVR is approximately 11425% more volatile than APXT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Apex Technology Acquisition Corporation (APXT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 4% versus 5% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — APXT or EVR or GS or LAZ or MS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Evercore Inc.
(EVR) is pulling ahead at 29. 5% versus 3. 2% for Lazard Ltd (LAZ). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. grew EPS 77. 3% year-over-year, compared to -67. 7% for Apex Technology Acquisition 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 — APXT or EVR or GS or LAZ or MS?
Evercore Inc.
(EVR) is the more profitable company, earning 15. 3% net margin versus -8. 8% for Apex Technology Acquisition Corporation — meaning it keeps 15. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: EVR leads at 20. 5% versus 2. 2% for APXT. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — EVR leads at 99. 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 APXT or EVR or GS or LAZ or MS 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, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 13x versus Morgan Stanley's 1. 82x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS) trades at 15. 8x forward P/E versus 17. 8x for Evercore Inc. — 2. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for EVR: 15. 6% to $382. 67.
08Which pays a better dividend — APXT or EVR or GS or LAZ or MS?
In this comparison, LAZ (3.
8% yield), MS (2. 0% yield), GS (1. 5% yield), EVR (1. 0% yield) pay a dividend. APXT does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is APXT or EVR or GS or LAZ or MS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Apex Technology Acquisition Corporation (APXT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
02)). Lazard Ltd (LAZ) carries a higher beta of 1. 78 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (APXT: +2. 2%, LAZ: +105. 3%), 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 APXT and EVR and GS and LAZ and MS?
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: APXT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; EVR is a mid-cap high-growth stock; GS is a large-cap high-growth stock; LAZ is a small-cap income-oriented stock; MS is a large-cap high-growth stock. EVR, GS, LAZ, MS pay a dividend while APXT 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 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.