Specialty Business Services
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
BLMZ vs COHN vs JPM vs BAC vs GAIN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Capital Markets
Banks - Diversified
Banks - Diversified
Asset Management
BLMZ vs COHN vs JPM vs BAC vs GAIN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Specialty Business Services | Financial - Capital Markets | Banks - Diversified | Banks - Diversified | Asset Management |
| Market Cap | $165K | $73M | $908.57B | $424.14B | $589M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $255M | $278M | $280.33B | $191.57B | $112M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-35M | $14M | $57.05B | $30.51B | $195M |
| Gross Margin | 28.4% | 93.8% | 60.0% | 56.1% | 57.9% |
| Operating Margin | -13.2% | 22.3% | 25.9% | 19.7% | 118.5% |
| Forward P/E | — | 2.7x | 14.6x | 12.6x | 36.4x |
| Total Debt | $39M | $450M | $942.38B | $365.90B | $564M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $149M | $57M | $343.34B | $231.84B | $1M |
BLMZ vs COHN vs JPM vs BAC vs GAIN — 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% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 143.7 | +43.7% |
| Bank of America Cor… (BAC) | 100 | 132.0 | +32.0% |
| Gladstone Investmen… (GAIN) | 100 | 98.6 | -1.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: BLMZ vs COHN vs JPM vs BAC vs GAIN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
BLMZ lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
COHN carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and defensive.
- Rev growth 249.6%, EPS growth 55.4%
- Beta 0.60, yield 3.0%, current ratio 3.87x
- 249.6% NII/revenue growth vs GAIN's -20.5%
- Lower P/E (2.7x vs 36.4x)
JPM ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding.
- 481.2% 10Y total return vs BAC's 371.6%
- 1.8% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs GAIN's 10.0%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
BAC is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.82 vs GAIN's 1.21
GAIN is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.47, yield 10.0%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.47, Low D/E 84.5%, current ratio 0.01x
- NIM 4.1% vs BAC's 1.8%
- 173.6% margin vs BLMZ's -13.6%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 249.6% NII/revenue growth vs GAIN's -20.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (2.7x vs 36.4x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 173.6% margin vs BLMZ's -13.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.47 vs BLMZ's 3.64 | |
| Dividends | 1.8% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs GAIN's 10.0%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +81.6% vs BLMZ's -99.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 16.3% ROA vs BLMZ's -8.1%, ROIC 15.5% vs -49.8% |
BLMZ vs COHN vs JPM vs BAC vs GAIN — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
BLMZ vs COHN vs JPM vs BAC vs GAIN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
BLMZ leads in 1 of 6 categories
GAIN leads 1 • COHN leads 1 • JPM leads 0 • BAC leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — COHN and GAIN each lead in 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM is the larger business by revenue, generating $280.3B annually — 2496.9x GAIN's $112M. GAIN is the more profitable business, keeping 173.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BLMZ's -13.6%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $255M | $278M | $280.3B | $191.6B | $112M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$19M | $63M | $81.4B | $40.0B | $133M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$35M | $14M | $57.0B | $30.5B | $195M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$67M | $26M | $100.9B | $12.6B | $26M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +28.4% | +93.8% | +60.0% | +56.1% | +57.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -13.2% | +22.3% | +25.9% | +19.7% | +118.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -13.6% | +5.2% | +20.4% | +15.9% | +173.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -26.1% | +9.4% | +36.0% | +6.6% | +23.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +108.4% | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -112.5% | +5.4% | +16.0% | +18.3% | +3.2% |
Valuation Metrics
BLMZ leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 2.7x trailing earnings, COHN trades at a 83% valuation discount to JPM's 16.2x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), GAIN offers better value at 0.10x vs BAC's 0.96x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $165,187 | $73M | $908.6B | $424.1B | $589M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | -$534,276 | $467M | $1.51T | $558.2B | $1.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.01x | 2.74x | 16.22x | 14.71x | 3.10x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 14.60x | 12.60x | 36.40x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.92x | 0.96x | 0.10x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 7.42x | 18.52x | 13.95x | 5.10x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.12x | 0.26x | 3.25x | 2.21x | 8.23x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.00x | 0.69x | 2.51x | 1.40x | 0.86x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 2.80x | 9.01x | 33.63x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
GAIN leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
GAIN delivers a 34.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $34 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), BAC scores 7/9 vs BLMZ's 1/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -16.5% | +15.1% | +15.9% | +10.1% | +34.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -8.1% | +1.6% | +1.3% | +0.9% | +16.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -49.8% | +12.2% | +4.5% | +3.5% | +15.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -49.5% | +7.6% | +8.9% | +4.5% | +25.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 6 | 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.08x | 4.37x | 2.60x | 1.21x | 0.84x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$109M | $393M | $599.0B | $134.1B | $563M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $149M | $57M | $343.3B | $231.8B | $1M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $39M | $450M | $942.4B | $365.9B | $564M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -10.16x | 8.32x | 0.74x | 0.48x | 3.48x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
COHN leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in JPM five years ago would be worth $23,548 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $5 for BLMZ. Over the past 12 months, COHN leads with a +81.6% total return vs BLMZ's -99.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors COHN at 61.3% vs BLMZ's -92.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -38.5% | -39.6% | +0.8% | +1.4% | +8.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -99.2% | +81.6% | +20.9% | +27.2% | +11.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.9% | +320.0% | +138.8% | +105.5% | +48.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.9% | +1.0% | +135.5% | +57.4% | +57.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.9% | +152.8% | +481.2% | +371.6% | +272.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -92.1% | +61.3% | +33.7% | +27.1% | +14.2% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — BAC and GAIN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
GAIN is the less volatile stock with a 0.47 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than BLMZ's 3.64 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. BAC currently trades 96.9% from its 52-week high vs BLMZ's 0.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 3.64x | 0.60x | 0.87x | 0.83x | 0.47x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $3.19 | $32.60 | $338.09 | $57.98 | $17.14 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.01 | $8.50 | $269.72 | $44.21 | $13.11 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +0.4% | +36.5% | +96.2% | +96.9% | +86.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 32.5 | 43.2 | 72.1 | 70.9 | 34.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1K | 31K | 7.4M | 32.4M | 345K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — JPM and GAIN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: JPM as "Buy", BAC as "Buy", GAIN as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 15.0% upside for GAIN (target: $17) vs 4.5% for JPM (target: $340). For income investors, GAIN offers the higher dividend yield at 9.99% vs JPM's 1.83%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | — | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | — | $339.75 | $61.13 | $17.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | — | 61 | 54 | 7 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +3.0% | +1.8% | +2.3% | +10.0% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 15 | 12 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.36 | $5.95 | $1.27 | $1.48 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +3.8% | +5.1% | 0.0% |
BLMZ leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). GAIN leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
BLMZ vs COHN vs JPM vs BAC vs GAIN: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is BLMZ or COHN or JPM or BAC or GAIN 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 -20. 5% for Gladstone Investment Corporation (GAIN). Cohen & Company Inc. (COHN) offers the better valuation at 2. 7x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) a "Buy" — based on 61 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 JPM or BAC or GAIN?
On trailing P/E, Cohen & Company Inc.
(COHN) is the cheapest at 2. 7x versus JPMorgan Chase & Co. at 16. 2x. On forward P/E, Bank of America Corporation is actually cheaper at 12. 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: Bank of America Corporation wins at 0. 82x versus Gladstone Investment Corporation's 1. 21x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — BLMZ or COHN or JPM or BAC or GAIN?
Over the past 5 years, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) delivered a total return of +135. 5%, compared to -99. 9% for Harrison Global Holdings Inc. (BLMZ). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: JPM returned +481. 2% 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 JPM or BAC or GAIN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Gladstone Investment Corporation (GAIN) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
47β versus Harrison Global Holdings Inc. 's 3. 64β — meaning BLMZ is approximately 676% more volatile than GAIN 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 JPM or BAC or GAIN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Cohen & Company Inc.
(COHN) is pulling ahead at 249. 6% versus -20. 5% 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 JPM or BAC or GAIN?
Gladstone Investment Corporation (GAIN) is the more profitable company, earning 258.
5% net margin versus -100. 5% for Harrison Global Holdings Inc. — meaning it keeps 258. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: GAIN leads at 315. 8% 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 JPM or BAC or GAIN 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, Bank of America Corporation (BAC) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 82x versus Gladstone Investment Corporation's 1. 21x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Bank of America Corporation (BAC) trades at 12. 6x forward P/E versus 36. 4x for Gladstone Investment Corporation — 23. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for GAIN: 15. 0% to $17. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — BLMZ or COHN or JPM or BAC or GAIN?
In this comparison, GAIN (10.
0% yield), COHN (3. 0% yield), BAC (2. 3% yield), JPM (1. 8% yield) pay a dividend. BLMZ does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is BLMZ or COHN or JPM or BAC or GAIN 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.
47), 10. 0% yield, +272. 1% 10Y return). Harrison Global Holdings Inc. (BLMZ) carries a higher beta of 3. 64 — 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: +272. 1%, 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 JPM and BAC and GAIN?
These companies operate in different sectors (BLMZ (Industrials) and COHN (Financial Services) and JPM (Financial Services) and BAC (Financial Services) and GAIN (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; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock; BAC is a large-cap deep-value stock; GAIN is a small-cap deep-value stock. COHN, JPM, BAC, GAIN 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.