Specialty Business Services
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
BLMZ vs COHN vs GAIN vs HRZN vs TPVG
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Capital Markets
Asset Management
Asset Management
Asset Management
BLMZ vs COHN vs GAIN vs HRZN vs TPVG — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Specialty Business Services | Financial - Capital Markets | Asset Management | Asset Management | Asset Management |
| Market Cap | $165K | $87M | $657M | $199M | $243M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $255M | $278M | $90M | $40M | $97M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-35M | $14M | $130M | $28M | $-12M |
| Gross Margin | 28.4% | 93.8% | 68.6% | 18.0% | 83.5% |
| Operating Margin | -13.2% | 22.3% | 72.7% | -4.0% | 77.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | 3.3x | 40.7x | 6.1x | 6.5x |
| Total Debt | $39M | $450M | $456M | $473M | $469M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $149M | $57M | $14M | $106M | $20M |
BLMZ vs COHN vs GAIN vs HRZN vs TPVG — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jul 24 | Feb 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Harrison Global Hol… (BLMZ) | 100 | 0.1 | -99.9% |
| Cohen & Company Inc. (COHN) | 100 | 194.9 | +94.9% |
| Gladstone Investmen… (GAIN) | 100 | 98.6 | -1.4% |
| Horizon Technology … (HRZN) | 100 | 57.6 | -42.4% |
| TriplePoint Venture… (TPVG) | 100 | 67.5 | -32.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: BLMZ vs COHN vs GAIN vs HRZN vs TPVG
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
BLMZ plays a supporting role in this comparison — it may shine differently against other peers.
COHN carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 249.6%, EPS growth 55.4%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.48, current ratio 3.87x
- Beta 0.48, yield 2.5%, current ratio 3.87x
- 249.6% NII/revenue growth vs GAIN's -12.9%
GAIN is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 319.3% 10Y total return vs TPVG's 93.3%
- 72.7% margin vs BLMZ's -13.6%
- 10.5% ROA vs BLMZ's -8.1%, ROIC 5.3% vs -49.8%
HRZN is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and valuation efficiency.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.70, yield 27.8%
- PEG 0.26 vs TPVG's 6.41
TPVG is the clearest fit if your priority is bank quality.
- NIM 7.4% vs GAIN's 5.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 249.6% NII/revenue growth vs GAIN's -12.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (3.3x vs 6.5x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 72.7% margin vs BLMZ's -13.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.48 vs BLMZ's 1.87 | |
| Dividends | 2.5% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs HRZN's 27.8%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +106.3% vs BLMZ's -99.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 10.5% ROA vs BLMZ's -8.1%, ROIC 5.3% vs -49.8% |
BLMZ vs COHN vs GAIN vs HRZN vs TPVG — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
BLMZ vs COHN vs GAIN vs HRZN vs TPVG — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
COHN leads in 1 of 6 categories
BLMZ leads 1 • GAIN leads 0 • HRZN leads 0 • TPVG leads 0 • 4 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
COHN leads this category, winning 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
COHN is the larger business by revenue, generating $278M annually — 7.0x HRZN's $40M. GAIN is the more profitable business, keeping 72.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BLMZ's -13.6%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $255M | $278M | $90M | $40M | $97M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$19M | $63M | $58M | $19M | -$22M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$35M | $14M | $130M | $28M | -$12M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$67M | $26M | -$82M | $67M | $35M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +28.4% | +93.8% | +68.6% | +18.0% | +83.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -13.2% | +22.3% | +72.7% | -4.0% | +77.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -13.6% | +5.2% | +72.7% | -6.6% | +50.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -26.1% | +9.4% | +126.8% | +141.5% | -58.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +108.4% | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -112.5% | +5.4% | +58.1% | -29.6% | -2.3% |
Valuation Metrics
BLMZ leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 3.3x trailing earnings, COHN trades at a 65% valuation discount to GAIN's 9.3x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), HRZN offers better value at 0.18x vs TPVG's 4.84x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $165,187 | $87M | $657M | $199M | $243M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | -$534,276 | $481M | $1.1B | $567M | $691M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.01x | 3.27x | 9.28x | 4.30x | 4.91x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 40.66x | 6.10x | 6.50x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 0.18x | 4.84x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 7.65x | 16.82x | — | 9.13x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.12x | 0.31x | 7.31x | 4.97x | 2.50x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.00x | 0.82x | 1.22x | 0.60x | 0.68x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 3.34x | 5.77x | 3.51x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — BLMZ and COHN each lead in 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
GAIN delivers a 21.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $22 in annual profit, vs $-17 for BLMZ. BLMZ carries lower financial leverage with a 0.08x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to COHN's 4.37x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), COHN scores 6/9 vs BLMZ's 1/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -16.5% | +15.1% | +21.9% | +9.0% | -3.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -8.1% | +1.6% | +10.5% | +3.6% | -1.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -49.8% | +12.2% | +5.3% | -0.2% | +7.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -49.5% | +7.6% | +6.8% | -0.2% | +9.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 6 | 4 | 5 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.08x | 4.37x | 0.91x | 1.49x | 1.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$109M | $393M | $441M | $368M | $449M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $149M | $57M | $14M | $106M | $20M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $39M | $450M | $456M | $473M | $469M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -10.16x | 8.32x | 1.58x | 0.60x | -1.02x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — COHN and GAIN each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in GAIN five years ago would be worth $17,205 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $5 for BLMZ. Over the past 12 months, COHN leads with a +106.3% total return vs BLMZ's -99.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors COHN at 45.3% vs BLMZ's -92.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -38.5% | -31.3% | +20.7% | -26.7% | -6.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -99.2% | +106.3% | +30.8% | -23.2% | +19.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.9% | +206.8% | +56.5% | -27.7% | -3.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.9% | -35.6% | +72.0% | -32.8% | -13.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.9% | +156.3% | +319.3% | +52.9% | +93.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -92.1% | +45.3% | +16.1% | -10.3% | -1.2% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — COHN and GAIN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
COHN is the less volatile stock with a 0.48 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than BLMZ's 1.87 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. GAIN currently trades 96.3% from its 52-week high vs BLMZ's 0.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.87x | 0.48x | 0.53x | 0.70x | 0.83x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $3.90 | $32.60 | $17.14 | $8.46 | $7.53 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.01 | $7.78 | $13.11 | $3.80 | $4.48 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +0.3% | +43.6% | +96.3% | +53.3% | +79.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 32.5 | 31.0 | 69.9 | 58.5 | 58.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1K | 28K | 371K | 1.2M | 504K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — COHN and HRZN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: GAIN as "Hold", HRZN as "Hold", TPVG as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 49.4% upside for TPVG (target: $9) vs -9.1% for GAIN (target: $15). For income investors, HRZN offers the higher dividend yield at 27.80% vs COHN's 2.51%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | — | Hold | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | — | $15.00 | $6.50 | $8.95 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | — | 7 | 22 | 12 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +2.5% | +10.0% | +27.8% | +17.1% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.36 | $1.66 | $1.25 | $1.02 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
COHN leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). BLMZ leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 4 tied.
BLMZ vs COHN vs GAIN vs HRZN vs TPVG: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is BLMZ or COHN or GAIN or HRZN or TPVG a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Cohen & Company Inc.
(COHN) is the stronger pick with 249. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -12. 9% for Gladstone Investment Corporation (GAIN). Cohen & Company Inc. (COHN) offers the better valuation at 3. 3x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Gladstone Investment Corporation (GAIN) a "Hold" — based on 7 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 — BLMZ or COHN or GAIN or HRZN or TPVG?
On trailing P/E, Cohen & Company Inc.
(COHN) is the cheapest at 3. 3x versus Gladstone Investment Corporation at 9. 3x. On forward P/E, Horizon Technology Finance Corporation is actually cheaper at 6. 1x — 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: Horizon Technology Finance Corporation wins at 0. 26x versus TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp. 's 6. 41x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — BLMZ or COHN or GAIN or HRZN or TPVG?
Over the past 5 years, Gladstone Investment Corporation (GAIN) delivered a total return of +72.
0%, compared to -99. 9% for Harrison Global Holdings Inc. (BLMZ). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GAIN returned +319. 3% versus BLMZ's -99. 9%. 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 — BLMZ or COHN or GAIN or HRZN or TPVG?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Cohen & Company Inc.
(COHN) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 48β versus Harrison Global Holdings Inc. 's 1. 87β — meaning BLMZ is approximately 292% more volatile than COHN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Harrison Global Holdings Inc. (BLMZ) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 8% versus 4% for Cohen & Company Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — BLMZ or COHN or GAIN or HRZN or TPVG?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Cohen & Company Inc.
(COHN) is pulling ahead at 249. 6% versus -12. 9% for Gladstone Investment Corporation (GAIN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Cohen & Company Inc. grew EPS 55. 4% year-over-year, compared to -1299. 2% for Harrison Global Holdings 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 — BLMZ or COHN or GAIN or HRZN or TPVG?
Gladstone Investment Corporation (GAIN) is the more profitable company, earning 72.
7% net margin versus -100. 5% for Harrison Global Holdings Inc. — meaning it keeps 72. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: TPVG leads at 77. 9% versus -84. 5% for BLMZ. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — COHN leads at 93. 8%, 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 BLMZ or COHN or GAIN or HRZN or TPVG 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, Horizon Technology Finance Corporation (HRZN) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 26x versus TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp. 's 6. 41x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Horizon Technology Finance Corporation (HRZN) trades at 6. 1x forward P/E versus 40. 7x for Gladstone Investment Corporation — 34. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for TPVG: 49. 4% to $8. 95.
08Which pays a better dividend — BLMZ or COHN or GAIN or HRZN or TPVG?
In this comparison, HRZN (27.
8% yield), TPVG (17. 1% yield), GAIN (10. 0% yield), COHN (2. 5% yield) pay a dividend. BLMZ does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is BLMZ or COHN or GAIN or HRZN or TPVG better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Gladstone Investment Corporation (GAIN) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
53), 10. 0% yield, +319. 3% 10Y return). Harrison Global Holdings Inc. (BLMZ) carries a higher beta of 1. 87 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (GAIN: +319. 3%, BLMZ: -99. 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 BLMZ and COHN and GAIN and HRZN and TPVG?
These companies operate in different sectors (BLMZ (Industrials) and COHN (Financial Services) and GAIN (Financial Services) and HRZN (Financial Services) and TPVG (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: BLMZ is a small-cap high-growth stock; COHN is a small-cap high-growth stock; GAIN is a small-cap deep-value stock; HRZN is a small-cap high-growth stock; TPVG is a small-cap high-growth stock. COHN, GAIN, HRZN, TPVG pay a dividend while BLMZ 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.
- Sector: Financial Services
- Market Cap > $100B
- Revenue Growth > 8%
- Dividend Yield > 11.1%
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.