Comprehensive Stock Comparison
Compare Aspire Biopharma Holdings, Inc. (ASBPW) vs Cardio Diagnostics Holdings, Inc. (CDIO) 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Quality / Margins |  CDIO | -415.2% net margin vs ASBPW's -16K% |
| Stability / Safety |  ASBPW | Beta 0.76 vs CDIO's 2.02 |
| Dividends | Tie | Neither pays a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | CDIO | -62.1% vs ASBPW's -63.8% |
| Efficiency (ROA) | CDIO | -74.5% ROA vs ASBPW's -13.2% |
Who Each Stock Is For
Income & stability
ASBPWbeta 0.76
Growth exposure
CDIORev growth 104.5%, EPS growth 53.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 238.3%
Long-term compounding (10Y)
ASBPW-74.2% 10Y total return vs CDIO's -98.2%
Sleep-well-at-night portfolio
ASBPWLower volatility, beta 0.76, current ratio 0.09x
Defensive / Recession hedge
ASBPWBeta 0.76, current ratio 0.09x
Business Model
What each company does and how it makes money
Aspire Biopharma Holdings is a biotechnology company that develops advanced diagnostic solutions and molecular tests for disease detection. It generates revenue primarily through sales of its diagnostic assays and testing services to healthcare providers and research institutions. The company's competitive advantage lies in its proprietary genetic testing technology and specialized expertise in precision diagnostics.
Cardio Diagnostics develops and commercializes epigenetics-based clinical tests for cardiovascular disease risk assessment. It generates revenue primarily from sales of its Epi+Gen CHD test—a three-year symptomatic coronary heart disease risk assessment—to healthcare providers and through laboratory services. The company's moat lies in its proprietary epigenetic technology platform that offers more personalized cardiovascular risk prediction than traditional methods.
Financial Metrics Comparison
Side-by-side fundamentals across 2 stocks. BestLagging
Financial Scorecard
CDIO 3ASBPW 1CDIO3/5 metricsCDIO1/1 metricsCDIO4/5 metricsASBPW4/6 metricsCDIO leads in 3 of 6 categories (Financial Metrics, Valuation Metrics). ASBPW leads in 1 (Total Returns). 1 tied.
Financial Metrics (TTM)
CDIO is the larger business by revenue, generating $15,782 annually — 8.1x ASBPW's $1,941. CDIO is the more profitable business, keeping -415.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ASBPW's -16351.8%.
| Metric | ASBPWAspire Biopharma … | CDIOCardio Diagnostic… |
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1,941 | $15,782 |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$28M | -$6M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$32M | -$7M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$4M | -$6M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +45.5% | -10.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -10314.0% | -414.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -16351.8% | -415.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -1811.5% | -379.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -56.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +46.0% | -15.3% |
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ASBPWAspire Biopharma … | CDIOCardio Diagnostic… |
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $178,899 | $141M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1M | $135M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.01x | -0.57x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 4054.38x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 14.80x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CDIO scores 4/9 vs ASBPW's 3/9, reflecting mixed financial health.
| Metric | ASBPWAspire Biopharma … | CDIOCardio Diagnostic… |
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | -80.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -13.2% | -74.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | -2.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | — | -123.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.10x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1M | -$7M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $3,633 | $8M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1M | $969,863 |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -10.51x | -418.04x |
Total Returns (with DRIP)
A $10,000 investment in ASBPW five years ago would be worth $2,583 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $179 for CDIO. Over the past 12 months, CDIO leads with a -62.1% total return vs ASBPW's -63.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ASBPW at -36.3% vs CDIO's -68.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ASBPWAspire Biopharma … | CDIOCardio Diagnostic… |
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +16.7% | +85.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -63.8% | -62.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -74.2% | -96.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -74.2% | -98.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -74.2% | -98.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -36.3% | -68.0% |
Risk & Volatility
ASBPW is the less volatile stock with a 0.76 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CDIO's 2.02 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CDIO currently trades 30.2% from its 52-week high vs ASBPW's 24.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ASBPWAspire Biopharma … | CDIOCardio Diagnostic… |
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.76x | 2.02x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $0.09 | $17.39 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.01 | $0.97 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +24.1% | +30.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 49.0 | 64.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 41K | 3.3M |
Analyst Outlook
| Metric | ASBPWAspire Biopharma … | CDIOCardio Diagnostic… |
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | — |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | — |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | — |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% |
Historical Charts
Charts are rendered on first load. Hover for details.
Chart 1Total Return — 5 Years (Rebased to 100)
| Stock | Feb 25 | Mar 26 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aspire Biopharma Ho… (ASBPW) | 100 | 28.81 | -71.2% |
| Cardio Diagnostics … (CDIO) | 100 | 41.14 | -58.9% |
Aspire Biopharma Ho… (ASBPW) returned -74% over 5 years vs Cardio Diagnostics … (CDIO)'s -98%.
Chart 2Revenue Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2020 | 2024 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aspire Biopharma Ho… (ASBPW) | $0.00 | $0.00 | — |
| Cardio Diagnostics … (CDIO) | $0.00 | $34890.00 | — |
Cardio Diagnostics Holdings, Inc.'s revenue grew from $0M (2020) to $0M (2024) — a 0.0% CAGR.
Chart 3EPS Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2020 | 2024 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aspire Biopharma Ho… (ASBPW) | -0.07 | -1.52 | -1999.4% |
| Cardio Diagnostics … (CDIO) | -0.06 | -9.3 | -14522.6% |
Cardio Diagnostics Holdings, Inc.'s EPS grew from $-0.06 (2020) to $-9.30 (2024).
Chart 4Free Cash Flow — 5 Years
Aspire Biopharma Holdings, Inc. generated $-0M FCF in 2024 (+95% vs 2022). Cardio Diagnostics Holdings, Inc. generated $-5M FCF in 2024 (-672% vs 2021).
ASBPW vs CDIO: Frequently Asked Questions
6 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Which is the better long-term investment — ASBPW or CDIO?
Over the past 5 years, Aspire Biopharma Holdings, Inc. (ASBPW) delivered a total return of -74.2%, compared to -98.2% for Cardio Diagnostics Holdings, Inc. (CDIO). A $10,000 investment in ASBPW five years ago would be worth approximately $3K today (assuming dividends reinvested). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ASBPW returned -74.2% versus CDIO's -98.2%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
02Which is safer — ASBPW or CDIO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Aspire Biopharma Holdings, Inc. (ASBPW) is the lower-risk stock at 0.76β versus Cardio Diagnostics Holdings, Inc.'s 2.02β — meaning CDIO is approximately 167% more volatile than ASBPW relative to the S&P 500.
03Which has better profit margins — ASBPW or CDIO?
Cardio Diagnostics Holdings, Inc. (CDIO) is the more profitable company, earning -240.3% net margin versus -16351.8% for Aspire Biopharma Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps -240.3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CDIO leads at -239.8% versus -10314.0% for ASBPW. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CDIO leads at 100.0%, 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.
04Which pays a better dividend — ASBPW or CDIO?
None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend. All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.
05Is ASBPW or CDIO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Aspire Biopharma Holdings, Inc. (ASBPW) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.76)). Cardio Diagnostics Holdings, Inc. (CDIO) carries a higher beta of 2.02 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ASBPW: -74.2%, CDIO: -98.2%), 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.
06What are the main differences between ASBPW and CDIO?
Both stocks operate in the Healthcare sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both. 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.