Shell Companies
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
COLA vs MS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Capital Markets
COLA vs MS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Shell Companies | Financial - Capital Markets |
| Market Cap | $84M | $302.59B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $103.14B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $1M | $16.18B |
| Gross Margin | — | 55.6% |
| Operating Margin | — | 17.1% |
| Forward P/E | — | 16.0x |
| Total Debt | $250K | $360.49B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $0.00 | $75.74B |
COLA vs MS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Mar 25 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Columbus Acquisitio… (COLA) | 100 | 105.8 | +5.8% |
| Morgan Stanley (MS) | 100 | 163.0 | +63.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: COLA vs MS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
COLA is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- beta 0.06
- Lower volatility, beta 0.06
- Beta 0.06
MS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 16.8%, EPS growth 53.5%
- 7.3% 10Y total return vs COLA's 6.3%
- 16.8% NII/revenue growth vs COLA's -100.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 16.8% NII/revenue growth vs COLA's -100.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.06 vs MS's 1.37 | |
| Dividends | 2.0% yield; 11-year raise streak; the other pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +63.0% vs COLA's +4.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 1.8% ROA vs MS's 1.2%, ROIC -0.1% vs 2.9% |
COLA vs MS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
COLA vs MS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MS and COLA operate at a comparable scale, with $103.1B and $0 in trailing revenue.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $103.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $74,498 | $26.3B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $1M | $16.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$442,652 | -$6.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +55.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | +17.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | +13.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | -2.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +48.9% |
Valuation Metrics
COLA leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $84M | $302.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $84M | $587.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -1080.61x | 23.92x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 16.01x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.69x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 25.81x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 2.93x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 2.91x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
COLA leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
COLA delivers a 185.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $186 in annual profit, vs $15 for MS. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MS scores 5/9 vs COLA's 3/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +185.9% | +14.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.8% | +1.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -0.1% | +2.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -0.1% | +3.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 3.42x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $249,712 | $284.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $0 | $75.7B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $249,712 | $360.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 0.44x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MS leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MS five years ago would be worth $23,624 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $10,633 for COLA. Over the past 12 months, MS leads with a +63.0% total return vs COLA's +4.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MS at 33.6% vs COLA's 2.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +2.1% | +5.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +4.9% | +63.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +6.3% | +138.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +6.3% | +136.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +6.3% | +732.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +2.1% | +33.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — COLA and MS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
COLA is the less volatile stock with a 0.06 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than MS's 1.37 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.06x | 1.37x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $10.88 | $194.83 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $10.04 | $118.20 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +97.4% | +97.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 56.7 | 66.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 6K | 5.4M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
MS is the only dividend payer here at 2.00% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $205.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 52 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +2.0% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 11 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $3.81 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.4% |
COLA leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). MS leads in 1 (Total Returns). 1 tied.
COLA vs MS: Frequently Asked Questions
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is COLA or MS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Morgan Stanley (MS) is the stronger pick with 16.
8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -100. 0% for Columbus Acquisition Corp (COLA). Morgan Stanley (MS) offers the better valuation at 23. 9x trailing P/E (16. 0x forward), 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 is the better long-term investment — COLA or MS?
Over the past 5 years, Morgan Stanley (MS) delivered a total return of +136.
2%, compared to +6. 3% for Columbus Acquisition Corp (COLA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MS returned +732. 3% versus COLA's +6. 3%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — COLA or MS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Columbus Acquisition Corp (COLA) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
06β versus Morgan Stanley's 1. 37β — meaning MS is approximately 2206% more volatile than COLA relative to the S&P 500.
04Which is growing faster — COLA or MS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Morgan Stanley (MS) is pulling ahead at 16.
8% versus -100. 0% for Columbus Acquisition Corp (COLA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Columbus Acquisition Corp grew EPS 54. 0% year-over-year, compared to 53. 5% for Morgan Stanley. 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.
05Which has better profit margins — COLA or MS?
Morgan Stanley (MS) is the more profitable company, earning 13.
0% net margin versus 0. 0% for Columbus Acquisition Corp — meaning it keeps 13. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MS leads at 17. 1% versus 0. 0% for COLA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MS leads at 55. 6%, 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.
06Which pays a better dividend — COLA or MS?
In this comparison, MS (2.
0% yield) pays a dividend. COLA does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
07Is COLA or MS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Columbus Acquisition Corp (COLA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
06)). Both have compounded well over 10 years (COLA: +6. 3%, MS: +732. 3%), 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.
08What are the main differences between COLA and MS?
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: COLA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MS is a large-cap high-growth stock. MS pays a dividend while COLA 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 both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.