Asset Management
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
BCG vs SCHW vs LPL vs RJF vs LPLA
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Capital Markets
Consumer Electronics
Financial - Capital Markets
Financial - Capital Markets
BCG vs SCHW vs LPL vs RJF vs LPLA — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Asset Management | Financial - Capital Markets | Consumer Electronics | Financial - Capital Markets | Financial - Capital Markets |
| Market Cap | $35M | $159.04B | $4.32B | $30.26B | $24.83B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $164M | $26.00B | $25.81T | $15.91B | $16.99B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $1M | $8.85B | $226.31B | $2.15B | $863M |
| Gross Margin | 7.2% | 75.4% | 13.1% | 88.2% | 25.6% |
| Operating Margin | 0.9% | 29.6% | 2.0% | 28.7% | 13.4% |
| Forward P/E | — | 14.9x | 0.0x | 12.9x | 13.8x |
| Total Debt | $29M | $45.13B | $12.73T | $4.54B | $7.26B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $7M | $42.08B | $1.57T | $11.39B | $1.04B |
BCG vs SCHW vs LPL vs RJF vs LPLA — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Mar 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Binah Capital Group… (BCG) | 100 | 16.1 | -83.9% |
| The Charles Schwab … (SCHW) | 100 | 123.7 | +23.7% |
| LG Display Co., Ltd. (LPL) | 100 | 105.4 | +5.4% |
| Raymond James Finan… (RJF) | 100 | 119.6 | +19.6% |
| LPL Financial Holdi… (LPLA) | 100 | 117.2 | +17.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: BCG vs SCHW vs LPL vs RJF vs LPLA
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
BCG lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
SCHW carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.72, Low D/E 93.3%, current ratio 0.54x
- Beta 0.72, yield 1.4%, current ratio 0.54x
- 22.9% margin vs BCG's -3.2%
- Beta 0.72 vs LPL's 1.48, lower leverage
LPL is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if value and momentum is your priority.
- Lower P/E (0.0x vs 13.8x)
- +39.8% vs LPLA's -7.1%
RJF is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and valuation efficiency.
- Dividend streak 22 yrs, beta 1.05, yield 1.3%
- PEG 0.60 vs SCHW's 6.49
- NIM 2.4% vs BCG's 0.7%
LPLA ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 37.2%, EPS growth -22.2%
- 12.4% 10Y total return vs RJF's 394.5%
- 37.2% NII/revenue growth vs LPL's -3.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 37.2% NII/revenue growth vs LPL's -3.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (0.0x vs 13.8x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 22.9% margin vs BCG's -3.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.72 vs LPL's 1.48, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.4% yield, vs RJF's 1.3%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +39.8% vs LPLA's -7.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 232.8% ROA vs LPL's 0.8%, ROIC 6.0% vs 2.0% |
BCG vs SCHW vs LPL vs RJF vs LPLA — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
BCG vs SCHW vs LPL vs RJF vs LPLA — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
LPL leads in 1 of 6 categories
RJF leads 1 • BCG leads 0 • SCHW leads 0 • LPLA leads 0 • 4 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — SCHW and RJF each lead in 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LPL is the larger business by revenue, generating $25.81T annually — 157004.2x BCG's $164M. SCHW is the more profitable business, keeping 22.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BCG's -3.2%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $164M | $26.0B | $25.81T | $15.9B | $17.0B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $6M | $12.8B | $4.87T | $2.9B | $2.3B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $1M | $8.9B | $226.3B | $2.1B | $863M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $4M | $9.7B | $1.04T | $1.5B | -$1.1B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +7.2% | +75.4% | +13.1% | +88.2% | +25.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +0.9% | +29.6% | +2.0% | +28.7% | +13.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -3.2% | +22.9% | +0.9% | +13.4% | +5.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -0.4% | +7.9% | +4.0% | +14.1% | -5.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | -8.1% | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +2.2% | +41.5% | +61.2% | +15.3% | +4.2% |
Valuation Metrics
LPL leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 14.9x trailing earnings, RJF trades at a 50% valuation discount to SCHW's 29.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), RJF offers better value at 0.69x vs SCHW's 13.07x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $35M | $159.0B | $4.3B | $30.3B | $24.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $56M | $162.1B | $12.0B | $23.4B | $31.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -6.50x | 29.93x | 27.67x | 14.91x | 28.35x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 14.86x | 0.01x | 12.90x | 13.77x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 13.07x | — | 0.69x | 2.14x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 22.33x | 17.76x | 3.49x | 4.92x | 10.65x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.21x | 6.12x | 0.24x | 1.90x | 1.46x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 28.04x | 3.39x | 0.80x | 2.54x | 4.58x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 77.58x | 6.24x | 13.47x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
RJF leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
SCHW delivers a 2.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $3 in annual profit, vs $3 for LPL. RJF carries lower financial leverage with a 0.36x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to BCG's 23.41x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), SCHW scores 7/9 vs LPLA's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +5.8% | +2.9% | +2.9% | +16.4% | +18.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.5% | +2.3% | +0.8% | +2.5% | +5.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +2.9% | +6.0% | +2.0% | +20.9% | +16.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +3.2% | +9.5% | +3.0% | +22.0% | +19.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 3 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 23.41x | 0.93x | 1.62x | 0.36x | 1.36x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $21M | $3.1B | $11.16T | -$6.8B | $6.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $7M | $42.1B | $1.57T | $11.4B | $1.0B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $29M | $45.1B | $12.73T | $4.5B | $7.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 2.12x | 3.05x | 2.96x | 1.57x | 3.85x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — SCHW and LPL and LPLA each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in LPLA five years ago would be worth $20,210 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,189 for BCG. Over the past 12 months, LPL leads with a +39.8% total return vs LPLA's -7.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors SCHW at 24.8% vs BCG's -39.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -24.1% | -11.6% | +1.6% | -5.5% | -14.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -2.8% | +7.9% | +39.8% | +8.7% | -7.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -78.1% | +94.5% | -25.3% | +84.9% | +62.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -78.1% | +31.4% | -57.2% | +77.8% | +102.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -78.1% | +255.2% | -47.0% | +394.5% | +1240.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -39.7% | +24.8% | -9.2% | +22.7% | +17.5% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — SCHW and RJF each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
SCHW is the less volatile stock with a 0.72 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LPL's 1.48 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. RJF currently trades 86.4% from its 52-week high vs BCG's 60.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.25x | 0.72x | 1.48x | 1.05x | 1.10x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $3.44 | $107.50 | $5.67 | $177.66 | $403.58 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.36 | $83.19 | $2.97 | $138.82 | $281.51 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +60.5% | +83.3% | +76.2% | +86.4% | +76.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 54.8 | 47.8 | 53.8 | 65.1 | 53.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 707K | 9.3M | 1.9M | 1.3M | 875K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — SCHW and RJF each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: SCHW as "Buy", LPL as "Hold", RJF as "Hold", LPLA as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 42.4% upside for LPLA (target: $441) vs 10.1% for RJF (target: $169). For income investors, SCHW offers the higher dividend yield at 1.39% vs BCG's 0.25%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $119.11 | — | $169.00 | $441.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 50 | 14 | 24 | 22 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.2% | +1.4% | — | +1.3% | +0.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 0 | 1 | 22 | 4 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.01 | $1.24 | — | $2.01 | $1.19 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +4.2% | +0.5% |
LPL leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). RJF leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 4 tied.
BCG vs SCHW vs LPL vs RJF vs LPLA: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is BCG or SCHW or LPL or RJF or LPLA a better buy right now?
For growth investors, LPL Financial Holdings Inc.
(LPLA) is the stronger pick with 37. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 0% for LG Display Co. , Ltd. (LPL). Raymond James Financial, Inc. (RJF) offers the better valuation at 14. 9x trailing P/E (12. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate The Charles Schwab Corporation (SCHW) a "Buy" — based on 50 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 — BCG or SCHW or LPL or RJF or LPLA?
On trailing P/E, Raymond James Financial, Inc.
(RJF) is the cheapest at 14. 9x versus The Charles Schwab Corporation at 29. 9x. On forward P/E, LG Display Co. , Ltd. is actually cheaper at 0. 0x — 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: Raymond James Financial, Inc. wins at 0. 60x versus The Charles Schwab Corporation's 6. 49x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — BCG or SCHW or LPL or RJF or LPLA?
Over the past 5 years, LPL Financial Holdings Inc.
(LPLA) delivered a total return of +102. 1%, compared to -78. 1% for Binah Capital Group, Inc. (BCG). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LPLA returned +1241% versus BCG's -78. 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 — BCG or SCHW or LPL or RJF or LPLA?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Charles Schwab Corporation (SCHW) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
72β versus LG Display Co. , Ltd. 's 1. 48β — meaning LPL is approximately 105% more volatile than SCHW relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Raymond James Financial, Inc. (RJF) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 36% versus 23% for Binah Capital Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — BCG or SCHW or LPL or RJF or LPLA?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), LPL Financial Holdings Inc.
(LPLA) is pulling ahead at 37. 2% versus -3. 0% for LG Display Co. , Ltd. (LPL). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: LG Display Co. , Ltd. grew EPS 108. 3% year-over-year, compared to -1004. 0% for Binah Capital Group, 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 — BCG or SCHW or LPL or RJF or LPLA?
The Charles Schwab Corporation (SCHW) is the more profitable company, earning 22.
9% net margin versus -3. 2% for Binah Capital Group, Inc. — meaning it keeps 22. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: SCHW leads at 29. 6% versus 0. 9% for BCG. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — RJF leads at 88. 2%, 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 BCG or SCHW or LPL or RJF or LPLA 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, Raymond James Financial, Inc. (RJF) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 60x versus The Charles Schwab Corporation's 6. 49x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, LG Display Co. , Ltd. (LPL) trades at 0. 0x forward P/E versus 14. 9x for The Charles Schwab Corporation — 14. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LPLA: 42. 4% to $441. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — BCG or SCHW or LPL or RJF or LPLA?
In this comparison, SCHW (1.
4% yield), RJF (1. 3% yield), LPLA (0. 4% yield), BCG (0. 2% yield) pay a dividend. LPL does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is BCG or SCHW or LPL or RJF or LPLA better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, The Charles Schwab Corporation (SCHW) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
72), 1. 4% yield, +255. 2% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (SCHW: +255. 2%, LPL: -47. 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 BCG and SCHW and LPL and RJF and LPLA?
These companies operate in different sectors (BCG (Financial Services) and SCHW (Financial Services) and LPL (Technology) and RJF (Financial Services) and LPLA (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: BCG is a small-cap quality compounder stock; SCHW is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; LPL is a small-cap quality compounder stock; RJF is a mid-cap deep-value stock; LPLA is a mid-cap high-growth stock. SCHW, RJF pay a dividend while BCG, LPL, LPLA 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.