Furnishings, Fixtures & Appliances
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
ATER vs PRCH vs HIFS vs AMZN vs SHOP
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Software - Application
Banks - Regional
Specialty Retail
Software - Application
ATER vs PRCH vs HIFS vs AMZN vs SHOP — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Furnishings, Fixtures & Appliances | Software - Application | Banks - Regional | Specialty Retail | Software - Application |
| Market Cap | $12M | $1.23B | $626M | $2.92T | $145.00B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $69M | $483M | $217M | $742.78B | $12.37B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-19M | $-9M | $45M | $90.80B | $1.33B |
| Gross Margin | 56.8% | 72.4% | 30.1% | 50.6% | 48.0% |
| Operating Margin | 17.2% | 10.3% | 16.8% | 11.5% | 13.3% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 20.4x | 34.8x | 60.9x |
| Total Debt | $0.00 | $393M | $1.50B | $152.99B | $188M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $5M | $53M | $352M | $86.81B | $1.53B |
ATER vs PRCH vs HIFS vs AMZN vs SHOP — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aterian, Inc. (ATER) | 100 | 1.8 | -98.2% |
| Porch Group, Inc. (PRCH) | 100 | 111.9 | +11.9% |
| Hingham Institution… (HIFS) | 100 | 172.8 | +72.8% |
| Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) | 100 | 217.0 | +117.0% |
| Shopify Inc. (SHOP) | 100 | 145.8 | +45.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ATER vs PRCH vs HIFS vs AMZN vs SHOP
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ATER is the clearest fit if your priority is defensive.
- Beta 1.46, current ratio 1.70x
Among these 5 stocks, PRCH doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
HIFS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 1.25, yield 0.9%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.25, current ratio 0.11x
- Lower P/E (20.4x vs 60.9x)
- 13.0% margin vs ATER's -27.5%
AMZN is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if valuation efficiency is your priority.
- PEG 1.24 vs SHOP's 2.08
- +43.7% vs ATER's -35.1%
- 11.5% ROA vs ATER's -46.0%, ROIC 14.7% vs 59.7%
SHOP ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 30.1%, EPS growth -39.4%, 3Y rev CAGR 27.3%
- 41.2% 10Y total return vs AMZN's 7.0%
- 30.1% revenue growth vs ATER's -30.4%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 30.1% revenue growth vs ATER's -30.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (20.4x vs 60.9x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 13.0% margin vs ATER's -27.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.25 vs SHOP's 2.64 | |
| Dividends | 0.9% yield; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +43.7% vs ATER's -35.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 11.5% ROA vs ATER's -46.0%, ROIC 14.7% vs 59.7% |
ATER vs PRCH vs HIFS vs AMZN vs SHOP — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
ATER vs PRCH vs HIFS vs AMZN vs SHOP — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ATER leads in 1 of 6 categories
PRCH leads 1 • HIFS leads 0 • AMZN leads 0 • SHOP leads 0 • 4 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — HIFS and SHOP each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AMZN is the larger business by revenue, generating $742.8B annually — 10768.8x ATER's $69M. HIFS is the more profitable business, keeping 13.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ATER's -27.5%. On growth, SHOP holds the edge at +34.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $69M | $483M | $217M | $742.8B | $12.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $12M | $72M | $62M | $155.9B | $1.7B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$19M | -$9M | $45M | $90.8B | $1.3B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$15M | $72M | $30M | -$2.5B | $2.1B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +56.8% | +72.4% | +30.1% | +50.6% | +48.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +17.2% | +10.3% | +16.8% | +11.5% | +13.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -27.5% | -1.8% | +13.0% | +12.2% | +10.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -21.5% | +15.0% | +5.4% | -0.3% | +17.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -38.5% | +15.6% | — | +16.6% | +34.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -4.3% | -157.1% | +195.1% | +74.8% | +15.1% |
Valuation Metrics
ATER leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 22.3x trailing earnings, HIFS trades at a 81% valuation discount to SHOP's 118.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), AMZN offers better value at 1.35x vs SHOP's 4.06x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $12M | $1.2B | $626M | $2.92T | $145.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $7M | $1.6B | $1.8B | $2.98T | $143.7B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.51x | -348.15x | 22.33x | 37.82x | 118.87x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 20.43x | 34.77x | 60.91x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 1.35x | 4.06x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 0.62x | 27.52x | 47.53x | 20.47x | 95.83x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.18x | 2.56x | 2.88x | 4.07x | 12.55x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.64x | 52.25x | 1.46x | 7.14x | 10.82x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 23.71x | 53.27x | 378.98x | 72.25x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — ATER and AMZN each lead in 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
AMZN delivers a 23.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $23 in annual profit, vs $-85 for ATER. SHOP carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to PRCH's 17.55x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), PRCH scores 8/9 vs ATER's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -85.1% | -60.9% | +9.8% | +23.3% | +10.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -46.0% | -1.1% | +1.0% | +11.5% | +9.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +59.7% | +9.9% | +1.4% | +14.7% | +9.4% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +51.9% | +6.5% | +2.2% | +15.3% | +11.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 8 | 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 17.55x | 3.47x | 0.37x | 0.01x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$5M | $340M | $1.1B | $66.2B | -$1.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $5M | $53M | $352M | $86.8B | $1.5B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $0 | $393M | $1.5B | $153.0B | $188M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 13.93x | 1.35x | 0.44x | 39.96x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — PRCH and AMZN each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in AMZN five years ago would be worth $16,476 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $67 for ATER. Over the past 12 months, AMZN leads with a +43.7% total return vs ATER's -35.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors PRCH at 133.5% vs ATER's -48.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +70.2% | +22.3% | +6.3% | +19.7% | -28.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -35.1% | +5.9% | +14.4% | +43.7% | +18.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -86.6% | +1173.1% | +61.9% | +156.2% | +73.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.3% | -10.7% | -1.9% | +64.8% | +0.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.0% | +13.9% | +142.5% | +697.8% | +4123.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -48.8% | +133.5% | +17.4% | +36.8% | +20.2% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — HIFS and AMZN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
HIFS is the less volatile stock with a 1.25 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than SHOP's 2.64 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. AMZN currently trades 97.3% from its 52-week high vs ATER's 55.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.33x | 2.22x | 1.25x | 1.51x | 2.64x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $2.19 | $19.44 | $338.00 | $278.56 | $182.19 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.52 | $6.36 | $220.76 | $185.01 | $88.14 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +55.7% | +58.0% | +84.9% | +97.3% | +61.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 76.2 | 75.0 | 51.0 | 81.1 | 34.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 5.4M | 1.6M | 51K | 45.5M | 8.7M |
Analyst Outlook
PRCH leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: PRCH as "Buy", AMZN as "Buy", SHOP as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 77.3% upside for PRCH (target: $20) vs 13.1% for AMZN (target: $307). HIFS is the only dividend payer here at 0.87% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | — | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $20.00 | — | $306.77 | $164.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 13 | — | 94 | 63 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +0.9% | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 1 | 0 | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $2.50 | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
ATER leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). PRCH leads in 1 (Analyst Outlook). 4 tied.
ATER vs PRCH vs HIFS vs AMZN vs SHOP: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ATER or PRCH or HIFS or AMZN or SHOP a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Shopify Inc.
(SHOP) is the stronger pick with 30. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -30. 4% for Aterian, Inc. (ATER). Hingham Institution for Savings (HIFS) offers the better valuation at 22. 3x trailing P/E (20. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Porch Group, Inc. (PRCH) a "Buy" — based on 13 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 — ATER or PRCH or HIFS or AMZN or SHOP?
On trailing P/E, Hingham Institution for Savings (HIFS) is the cheapest at 22.
3x versus Shopify Inc. at 118. 9x. On forward P/E, Hingham Institution for Savings is actually cheaper at 20. 4x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Amazon. com, Inc. wins at 1. 24x versus Shopify Inc. 's 2. 08x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ATER or PRCH or HIFS or AMZN or SHOP?
Over the past 5 years, Amazon.
com, Inc. (AMZN) delivered a total return of +64. 8%, compared to -99. 3% for Aterian, Inc. (ATER). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: SHOP returned +41. 2% versus ATER's -99. 1%. 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 — ATER or PRCH or HIFS or AMZN or SHOP?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Hingham Institution for Savings (HIFS) is the lower-risk stock at 1.
25β versus Shopify Inc. 's 2. 64β — meaning SHOP is approximately 111% more volatile than HIFS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Shopify Inc. (SHOP) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 18% for Porch Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ATER or PRCH or HIFS or AMZN or SHOP?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Shopify Inc.
(SHOP) is pulling ahead at 30. 1% versus -30. 4% for Aterian, Inc. (ATER). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Porch Group, Inc. grew EPS 90. 2% year-over-year, compared to -42. 3% for Aterian, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, SHOP leads at 27. 3% 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 — ATER or PRCH or HIFS or AMZN or SHOP?
Hingham Institution for Savings (HIFS) is the more profitable company, earning 13.
0% net margin versus -27. 5% for Aterian, Inc. — meaning it keeps 13. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ATER leads at 17. 2% versus 7. 6% for PRCH. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — PRCH leads at 70. 5%, 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 ATER or PRCH or HIFS or AMZN or SHOP 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, Amazon. com, Inc. (AMZN) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 24x versus Shopify Inc. 's 2. 08x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Hingham Institution for Savings (HIFS) trades at 20. 4x forward P/E versus 60. 9x for Shopify Inc. — 40. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PRCH: 77. 3% to $20. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — ATER or PRCH or HIFS or AMZN or SHOP?
In this comparison, HIFS (0.
9% yield) pays a dividend. ATER, PRCH, AMZN, SHOP do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is ATER or PRCH or HIFS or AMZN or SHOP better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Hingham Institution for Savings (HIFS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1.
25), 0. 9% yield, +139. 9% 10Y return). Porch Group, Inc. (PRCH) carries a higher beta of 2. 22 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (HIFS: +139. 9%, PRCH: +13. 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 ATER and PRCH and HIFS and AMZN and SHOP?
These companies operate in different sectors (ATER (Consumer Cyclical) and PRCH (Technology) and HIFS (Financial Services) and AMZN (Consumer Cyclical) and SHOP (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: ATER is a small-cap quality compounder stock; PRCH is a small-cap quality compounder stock; HIFS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; AMZN is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; SHOP is a mid-cap high-growth stock. HIFS pays a dividend while ATER, PRCH, AMZN, SHOP 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.