Information Technology Services
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CTLP vs PAX vs IIIV vs FIS vs FISV
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Asset Management
Software - Infrastructure
Information Technology Services
Information Technology Services
CTLP vs PAX vs IIIV vs FIS vs FISV — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Information Technology Services | Asset Management | Software - Infrastructure | Information Technology Services | Information Technology Services |
| Market Cap | $826M | $1.92B | $506M | $24.47B | $30.38B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $318M | $384M | $223M | $10.89B | $21.09B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $55M | $86M | $16M | $382M | $3.20B |
| Gross Margin | 39.0% | 96.2% | 60.4% | 38.1% | 60.8% |
| Operating Margin | 6.0% | 34.2% | 0.8% | 17.5% | 24.4% |
| Forward P/E | 27.3x | 8.4x | 20.3x | 7.5x | 7.0x |
| Total Debt | $49M | $199M | $8M | $4.01B | $29.12B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $51M | $54M | $67M | $599M | $798M |
CTLP vs PAX vs IIIV vs FIS vs FISV — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jan 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cantaloupe, Inc. (CTLP) | 100 | 112.9 | +12.9% |
| Patria Investments … (PAX) | 100 | 67.5 | -32.5% |
| i3 Verticals, Inc. (IIIV) | 100 | 78.9 | -21.1% |
| Fidelity National I… (FIS) | 100 | 38.3 | -61.7% |
| Fiserv, Inc. (FISV) | 100 | 55.3 | -44.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CTLP vs PAX vs IIIV vs FIS vs FISV
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CTLP carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 12.6%, EPS growth 473.3%, 3Y rev CAGR 13.8%
- 141.9% 10Y total return vs IIIV's 24.9%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.38, Low D/E 19.2%, current ratio 1.86x
- Beta 0.38, current ratio 1.86x
PAX is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if quality and dividends is your priority.
- 22.3% margin vs FIS's 3.5%
- 5.0% yield, vs FIS's 3.5%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
IIIV lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
FIS is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.76, yield 3.5%
FISV ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.20 vs PAX's 2.99
- Lower P/E (7.0x vs 7.5x), PEG 0.20 vs 0.31
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 12.6% revenue growth vs IIIV's -7.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.0x vs 7.5x), PEG 0.20 vs 0.31 | |
| Quality / Margins | 22.3% margin vs FIS's 3.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.38 vs PAX's 1.09, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 5.0% yield, vs FIS's 3.5%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +36.3% vs FISV's -68.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 14.4% ROA vs FIS's 1.1%, ROIC 7.9% vs 6.0% |
CTLP vs PAX vs IIIV vs FIS vs FISV — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CTLP vs PAX vs IIIV vs FIS vs FISV — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
PAX leads in 2 of 6 categories
CTLP leads 2 • FISV leads 1 • IIIV leads 0 • FIS leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
PAX leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FISV is the larger business by revenue, generating $21.1B annually — 94.8x IIIV's $223M. PAX is the more profitable business, keeping 22.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FIS's 3.5%. On growth, FIS holds the edge at +8.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $318M | $384M | $223M | $10.9B | $21.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $39M | $174M | $31M | $3.8B | $7.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $55M | $86M | $16M | $382M | $3.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $26M | $268M | $10M | $2.8B | $4.0B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +39.0% | +96.2% | +60.4% | +38.1% | +60.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +6.0% | +34.2% | +0.8% | +17.5% | +24.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +17.3% | +22.3% | +7.3% | +3.5% | +15.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +8.1% | +67.3% | +4.7% | +26.1% | +19.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +6.8% | — | -14.6% | +8.2% | -2.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -101.5% | -40.5% | -78.0% | +92.3% | -29.1% |
Valuation Metrics
FISV leads this category, winning 7 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 9.0x trailing earnings, FISV trades at a 86% valuation discount to FIS's 63.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), FISV offers better value at 0.25x vs PAX's 7.92x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $826M | $1.9B | $506M | $24.5B | $30.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $823M | $2.1B | $447M | $27.9B | $58.7B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 13.02x | 22.30x | 40.91x | 63.00x | 8.96x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 27.32x | 8.42x | 20.30x | 7.54x | 7.01x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 7.92x | — | 2.58x | 0.25x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 20.51x | 15.74x | 14.02x | 7.66x | 6.63x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.73x | 5.01x | 2.37x | 2.29x | 1.43x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 3.30x | 3.00x | 1.51x | 1.76x | 1.21x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 247.43x | 7.44x | 134.87x | 9.97x | 7.00x |
Profitability & Efficiency
PAX leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CTLP delivers a 21.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $22 in annual profit, vs $3 for FIS. IIIV carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to FISV's 1.13x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CTLP scores 6/9 vs FISV's 5/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +21.8% | +14.4% | +3.2% | +2.7% | +12.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +14.4% | +6.3% | +2.6% | +1.1% | +4.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.9% | +12.5% | +0.6% | +6.0% | +8.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +8.4% | +13.9% | +0.7% | +6.6% | +10.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.19x | 0.31x | 0.01x | 0.29x | 1.13x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$3M | $145M | -$59M | $3.4B | $28.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $51M | $54M | $67M | $599M | $798M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $49M | $199M | $8M | $4.0B | $29.1B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 6.98x | 7.45x | 5.21x | 4.64x | 6.39x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CTLP leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in PAX five years ago would be worth $10,537 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,685 for FIS. Over the past 12 months, CTLP leads with a +36.3% total return vs FISV's -68.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CTLP at 18.6% vs FISV's -22.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +4.9% | -23.4% | -9.3% | -27.3% | -13.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +36.3% | +14.9% | -13.8% | -35.3% | -68.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +66.9% | -1.4% | -2.5% | -6.6% | -52.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +1.1% | +5.4% | -27.6% | -63.2% | -51.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +141.9% | -19.3% | +24.9% | -13.2% | +9.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +18.6% | -0.5% | -0.8% | -2.2% | -22.0% |
Risk & Volatility
CTLP leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CTLP is the less volatile stock with a 0.38 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than PAX's 1.09 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CTLP currently trades 99.9% from its 52-week high vs FISV's 29.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.38x | 1.09x | 0.92x | 0.76x | 0.94x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $11.21 | $17.80 | $33.97 | $82.74 | $191.91 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $7.57 | $10.86 | $19.89 | $43.30 | $52.91 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +99.9% | +67.6% | +67.4% | +57.1% | +29.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 75.8 | 54.1 | 47.8 | 43.3 | 36.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.2M | 885K | 292K | 5.5M | 5.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — CTLP and PAX and FIS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CTLP as "Buy", PAX as "Buy", IIIV as "Buy", FIS as "Buy", FISV as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 49.5% upside for PAX (target: $18) vs -1.8% for CTLP (target: $11). For income investors, PAX offers the higher dividend yield at 5.00% vs FIS's 3.45%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $11.00 | $18.00 | $29.00 | $67.38 | $74.64 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 5 | 5 | 14 | 37 | 60 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +5.0% | — | +3.5% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 0 | — | 1 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.60 | — | $1.63 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +2.9% | +7.4% | 0.0% | +19.4% |
PAX leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). CTLP leads in 2 (Total Returns, Risk & Volatility). 1 tied.
CTLP vs PAX vs IIIV vs FIS vs FISV: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CTLP or PAX or IIIV or FIS or FISV a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Cantaloupe, Inc.
(CTLP) is the stronger pick with 12. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -7. 3% for i3 Verticals, Inc. (IIIV). Fiserv, Inc. (FISV) offers the better valuation at 9. 0x trailing P/E (7. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Cantaloupe, Inc. (CTLP) a "Buy" — based on 5 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 — CTLP or PAX or IIIV or FIS or FISV?
On trailing P/E, Fiserv, Inc.
(FISV) is the cheapest at 9. 0x versus Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. at 63. 0x. On forward P/E, Fiserv, Inc. is actually cheaper at 7. 0x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Fiserv, Inc. wins at 0. 20x versus Patria Investments Limited's 2. 99x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CTLP or PAX or IIIV or FIS or FISV?
Over the past 5 years, Patria Investments Limited (PAX) delivered a total return of +5.
4%, compared to -63. 2% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CTLP returned +141. 9% versus PAX's -19. 3%. 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 — CTLP or PAX or IIIV or FIS or FISV?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Cantaloupe, Inc.
(CTLP) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 38β versus Patria Investments Limited's 1. 09β — meaning PAX is approximately 189% more volatile than CTLP relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, i3 Verticals, Inc. (IIIV) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 113% for Fiserv, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CTLP or PAX or IIIV or FIS or FISV?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Cantaloupe, Inc.
(CTLP) is pulling ahead at 12. 6% versus -7. 3% for i3 Verticals, Inc. (IIIV). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Cantaloupe, Inc. grew EPS 473. 3% year-over-year, compared to -87. 9% for i3 Verticals, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CTLP leads at 13. 8% annualised revenue growth. 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 — CTLP or PAX or IIIV or FIS or FISV?
Patria Investments Limited (PAX) is the more profitable company, earning 22.
3% net margin versus 3. 6% for Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. — meaning it keeps 22. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: PAX leads at 34. 2% versus 1. 9% for IIIV. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — PAX leads at 96. 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 CTLP or PAX or IIIV or FIS or FISV 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, Fiserv, Inc. (FISV) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 20x versus Patria Investments Limited's 2. 99x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Fiserv, Inc. (FISV) trades at 7. 0x forward P/E versus 27. 3x for Cantaloupe, Inc. — 20. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PAX: 49. 5% to $18. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — CTLP or PAX or IIIV or FIS or FISV?
In this comparison, PAX (5.
0% yield), FIS (3. 5% yield) pay a dividend. CTLP, IIIV, FISV do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CTLP or PAX or IIIV or FIS or FISV better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc.
(FIS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 76), 3. 5% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (FIS: -13. 2%, FISV: +9. 7%), 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 CTLP and PAX and IIIV and FIS and FISV?
These companies operate in different sectors (CTLP (Technology) and PAX (Financial Services) and IIIV (Technology) and FIS (Technology) and FISV (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: CTLP is a small-cap deep-value stock; PAX is a small-cap income-oriented stock; IIIV is a small-cap quality compounder stock; FIS is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; FISV is a mid-cap deep-value stock. PAX, FIS pay a dividend while CTLP, IIIV, FISV 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.