Shell Companies
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
ATMV vs MS vs GS vs BX
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Capital Markets
Financial - Capital Markets
Asset Management
ATMV vs MS vs GS vs BX — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Shell Companies | Financial - Capital Markets | Financial - Capital Markets | Asset Management |
| Market Cap | $33M | $302.59B | $287.62B | $95.85B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $103.14B | $126.85B | $13.83B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-476K | $16.18B | $16.67B | $3.02B |
| Gross Margin | — | 55.6% | 41.1% | 86.0% |
| Operating Margin | — | 17.1% | 14.5% | 51.9% |
| Forward P/E | 21.9x | 16.0x | 15.6x | 20.5x |
| Total Debt | $1M | $360.49B | $616.93B | $13.31B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $4K | $75.74B | $182.09B | $2.63B |
ATMV vs MS vs GS vs BX — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jan 23 | Dec 25 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| AlphaVest Acquisiti… (ATMV) | 100 | 101.4 | +1.4% |
| Morgan Stanley (MS) | 100 | 174.3 | +74.3% |
| The Goldman Sachs G… (GS) | 100 | 225.8 | +125.8% |
| Blackstone Inc. (BX) | 100 | 152.6 | +52.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ATMV vs MS vs GS vs BX
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ATMV is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and bank quality.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.64, Low D/E 6.9%, current ratio 0.00x
- NIM 14.8% vs GS's 0.5%
- Beta 0.64 vs BX's 1.53, lower leverage
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%
- Beta 1.37, yield 2.0%, current ratio 0.66x
GS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 17.0%, EPS growth 77.3%
- Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs MS's 0.4% (lower = leaner)
- 1.5% yield, 12-year raise streak, vs BX's 6.3%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
- +70.6% vs ATMV's -12.5%
BX is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if valuation efficiency is your priority.
- PEG 0.98 vs MS's 1.80
- 21.6% NII/revenue growth vs ATMV's -59.7%
- PEG 0.98 vs 1.80
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 21.6% NII/revenue growth vs ATMV's -59.7% | |
| Value | PEG 0.98 vs 1.80 | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs MS's 0.4% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.64 vs BX's 1.53, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.5% yield, 12-year raise streak, vs BX's 6.3%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +70.6% vs ATMV's -12.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs MS's 0.4% |
ATMV vs MS vs GS vs BX — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
ATMV vs MS vs GS vs BX — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
BX leads in 3 of 6 categories
GS leads 1 • ATMV leads 0 • MS leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
BX leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
GS and ATMV operate at a comparable scale, with $126.9B and $0 in trailing revenue. BX is the more profitable business, keeping 21.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to GS's 11.3%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $103.1B | $126.9B | $13.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $2M | $26.3B | $23.4B | $7.2B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$476,106 | $16.2B | $16.7B | $3.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $51,618 | -$6.7B | $15.8B | $3.5B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +55.6% | +41.1% | +86.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | +17.1% | +14.5% | +51.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | +13.0% | +11.3% | +21.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | -2.0% | -12.1% | +12.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -8.0% | +48.9% | +45.8% | +41.3% |
Valuation Metrics
BX leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 21.9x trailing earnings, ATMV trades at a 30% valuation discount to BX's 31.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), BX offers better value at 1.51x vs MS's 2.69x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $33M | $302.6B | $287.6B | $95.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $34M | $587.3B | $722.5B | $106.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 21.91x | 23.92x | 22.84x | 31.53x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 16.01x | 15.64x | 20.50x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.69x | 1.63x | 1.51x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 20.05x | 25.81x | 34.75x | 14.77x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 2.93x | 2.27x | 6.93x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.43x | 2.91x | 2.53x | 4.37x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 1082.23x | — | — | 54.93x |
Profitability & Efficiency
BX leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MS delivers a 14.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $15 in annual profit, vs $7 for ATMV. ATMV carries lower financial leverage with a 0.07x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to GS's 5.06x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MS scores 5/9 vs GS's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +6.5% | +14.6% | +12.6% | +14.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -2.5% | +1.2% | +0.9% | +6.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -1.9% | +2.9% | +1.9% | +16.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -2.6% | +3.8% | +3.6% | +16.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.07x | 3.42x | 5.06x | 0.61x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1M | $284.7B | $434.8B | $10.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $4,215 | $75.7B | $182.1B | $2.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1M | $360.5B | $616.9B | $13.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 0.44x | 0.31x | 14.12x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
GS leads this category, winning 4 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 $10,198 for ATMV. Over the past 12 months, GS leads with a +70.6% total return vs ATMV's -12.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors GS at 43.5% vs ATMV's 0.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | — | +5.7% | +1.8% | -21.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -12.5% | +63.0% | +70.6% | -6.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +0.3% | +138.4% | +195.2% | +65.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +2.0% | +136.2% | +164.4% | +59.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +2.0% | +732.3% | +534.3% | +476.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +0.1% | +33.6% | +43.5% | +18.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ATMV and MS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ATMV is the less volatile stock with a 0.64 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than BX's 1.53 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MS currently trades 97.6% from its 52-week high vs ATMV's 24.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.64x | 1.37x | 1.47x | 1.53x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $42.00 | $194.83 | $984.70 | $190.09 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $5.43 | $118.20 | $547.74 | $101.73 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +24.5% | +97.6% | +94.0% | +64.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 62.4 | 66.0 | 59.5 | 54.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 12.6M | 5.4M | 2.0M | 7.1M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — GS and BX each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: MS as "Buy", GS as "Hold", BX as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 27.8% upside for BX (target: $156) vs 7.6% for GS (target: $996). For income investors, BX offers the higher dividend yield at 6.30% vs GS's 1.46%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $205.75 | $995.89 | $156.29 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 52 | 55 | 29 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +2.0% | +1.5% | +6.3% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 11 | 12 | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $3.81 | $13.48 | $7.70 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +100.0% | +1.4% | +3.5% | +0.3% |
BX leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). GS leads in 1 (Total Returns). 2 tied.
ATMV vs MS vs GS vs BX: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ATMV or MS or GS or BX a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Blackstone Inc.
(BX) is the stronger pick with 21. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 16. 8% for Morgan Stanley (MS). AlphaVest Acquisition Corp (ATMV) offers the better valuation at 21. 9x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Morgan Stanley (MS) a "Buy" — based on 52 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 — ATMV or MS or GS or BX?
On trailing P/E, AlphaVest Acquisition Corp (ATMV) is the cheapest at 21.
9x versus Blackstone Inc. at 31. 5x. On forward P/E, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. is actually cheaper at 15. 6x — 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: Blackstone Inc. wins at 0. 98x versus Morgan Stanley's 1. 80x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ATMV or MS or GS or BX?
Over the past 5 years, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
(GS) delivered a total return of +164. 4%, compared to +2. 0% for AlphaVest Acquisition Corp (ATMV). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MS returned +732. 3% versus ATMV's +2. 0%. 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 — ATMV or MS or GS or BX?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), AlphaVest Acquisition Corp (ATMV) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
64β versus Blackstone Inc. 's 1. 53β — meaning BX is approximately 138% more volatile than ATMV relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, AlphaVest Acquisition Corp (ATMV) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 7% versus 5% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ATMV or MS or GS or BX?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Blackstone Inc.
(BX) is pulling ahead at 21. 6% versus 16. 8% for Morgan Stanley (MS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. grew EPS 77. 3% year-over-year, compared to 7. 2% for Blackstone Inc.. 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 — ATMV or MS or GS or BX?
Blackstone Inc.
(BX) is the more profitable company, earning 21. 8% net margin versus 0. 0% for AlphaVest Acquisition Corp — meaning it keeps 21. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: BX leads at 51. 9% versus 0. 0% for ATMV. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BX leads at 86. 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.
07Is ATMV or MS or GS or BX 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, Blackstone Inc. (BX) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 98x versus Morgan Stanley's 1. 80x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS) trades at 15. 6x forward P/E versus 20. 5x for Blackstone Inc. — 4. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for BX: 27. 8% to $156. 29.
08Which pays a better dividend — ATMV or MS or GS or BX?
In this comparison, BX (6.
3% yield), MS (2. 0% yield), GS (1. 5% yield) pay a dividend. ATMV does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is ATMV or MS or GS or BX better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Morgan Stanley (MS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (2.
0% yield, +732. 3% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MS: +732. 3%, ATMV: +2. 0%), 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 ATMV and MS and GS and BX?
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: ATMV is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MS is a large-cap high-growth stock; GS is a large-cap high-growth stock; BX is a mid-cap high-growth stock. MS, GS, BX pay a dividend while ATMV 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.