Shell Companies
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
CUB vs ARES
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Asset Management
CUB vs ARES — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Shell Companies | Asset Management |
| Market Cap | $83M | $40.44B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $6.47B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $10M | $527M |
| Gross Margin | — | 74.8% |
| Operating Margin | — | 27.2% |
| Forward P/E | 3.7x | 20.2x |
| Total Debt | $0.00 | $14.91B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $891K | $1.50B |
CUB vs ARES — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Aug 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lionheart Holdings (CUB) | 100 | 107.9 | +7.9% |
| Ares Management Cor… (ARES) | 100 | 80.2 | -19.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CUB vs ARES
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CUB carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for sleep-well-at-night and valuation efficiency.
- Lower volatility, beta -0.02, current ratio 12.25x
- PEG 0.15 vs ARES's 1.15
- Beta -0.02, current ratio 12.25x
ARES is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 7 yrs, beta 1.62, yield 6.6%
- Rev growth 66.6%, EPS growth -5.3%
- 9.3% 10Y total return vs CUB's 21.7%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 66.6% NII/revenue growth vs CUB's -100.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (3.7x vs 20.2x), PEG 0.15 vs 1.15 | |
| Dividends | 6.6% yield; 7-year raise streak; the other pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +4.5% vs ARES's -21.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 4.3% ROA vs ARES's 1.9%, ROIC -0.0% vs 6.1% |
CUB vs ARES — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CUB vs ARES — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CUB leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ARES and CUB operate at a comparable scale, with $6.5B and $0 in trailing revenue.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $6.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $2M | $1.8B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $10M | $527M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$589,072 | $1.5B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +74.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | +27.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | +8.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | +23.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -28.6% | -80.9% |
Valuation Metrics
CUB leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 56.8x trailing earnings, CUB trades at a 10% valuation discount to ARES's 62.8x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), CUB offers better value at 2.35x vs ARES's 3.56x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $83M | $40.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $82M | $53.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 56.84x | 62.83x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 3.71x | 20.23x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 2.35x | 3.56x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 826.61x | 26.88x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 6.25x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.02x | 3.08x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 26.19x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ARES leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ARES delivers a 6.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $6 in annual profit, vs $6 for CUB. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ARES scores 8/9 vs CUB's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +6.2% | +6.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +4.3% | +1.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -0.0% | +6.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -0.1% | +7.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 1.71x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$891,017 | $13.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $891,017 | $1.5B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $0 | $14.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 2.68x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
ARES leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ARES five years ago would be worth $26,021 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $10,822 for CUB. Over the past 12 months, CUB leads with a +4.5% total return vs ARES's -21.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ARES at 18.1% vs CUB's 2.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +1.6% | -25.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +4.5% | -21.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +8.2% | +64.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +8.2% | +160.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +21.7% | +929.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +2.7% | +18.1% |
Risk & Volatility
CUB leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CUB is the less volatile stock with a -0.02 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ARES's 1.62 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CUB currently trades 99.5% from its 52-week high vs ARES's 63.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -0.02x | 1.62x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $10.85 | $195.26 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $10.33 | $95.80 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +99.5% | +63.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 53.9 | 63.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 13K | 3.7M |
Analyst Outlook
ARES leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates CUB as "Buy" and ARES as "Buy". ARES is the only dividend payer here at 6.56% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $177.38 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 11 | 22 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +6.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 7 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $8.08 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% |
CUB leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). ARES leads in 3 (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns).
CUB vs ARES: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CUB or ARES a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Ares Management Corporation (ARES) is the stronger pick with 66.
6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -100. 0% for Lionheart Holdings (CUB). Lionheart Holdings (CUB) offers the better valuation at 56. 8x trailing P/E (3. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Lionheart Holdings (CUB) a "Buy" — based on 11 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 — CUB or ARES?
On trailing P/E, Lionheart Holdings (CUB) is the cheapest at 56.
8x versus Ares Management Corporation at 62. 8x. On forward P/E, Lionheart Holdings is actually cheaper at 3. 7x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Lionheart Holdings wins at 0. 15x versus Ares Management Corporation's 1. 15x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CUB or ARES?
Over the past 5 years, Ares Management Corporation (ARES) delivered a total return of +160.
2%, compared to +8. 2% for Lionheart Holdings (CUB). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ARES returned +951. 4% versus CUB's +21. 8%. 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 — CUB or ARES?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Lionheart Holdings (CUB) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
02β versus Ares Management Corporation's 1. 62β — meaning ARES is approximately -7222% more volatile than CUB relative to the S&P 500.
05Which is growing faster — CUB or ARES?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Ares Management Corporation (ARES) is pulling ahead at 66.
6% versus -100. 0% for Lionheart Holdings (CUB). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Lionheart Holdings grew EPS 290. 0% year-over-year, compared to -5. 3% for Ares Management Corporation. 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 — CUB or ARES?
Ares Management Corporation (ARES) is the more profitable company, earning 8.
2% net margin versus 0. 0% for Lionheart Holdings — meaning it keeps 8. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ARES leads at 27. 2% versus 0. 0% for CUB. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ARES leads at 74. 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 CUB or ARES 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, Lionheart Holdings (CUB) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 15x versus Ares Management Corporation's 1. 15x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Lionheart Holdings (CUB) trades at 3. 7x forward P/E versus 20. 2x for Ares Management Corporation — 16. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis.
08Which pays a better dividend — CUB or ARES?
In this comparison, ARES (6.
6% yield) pays a dividend. CUB does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CUB or ARES better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Lionheart Holdings (CUB) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
02)). Ares Management Corporation (ARES) carries a higher beta of 1. 62 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (CUB: +21. 8%, ARES: +951. 4%), 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 CUB and ARES?
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: CUB is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ARES is a mid-cap high-growth stock. ARES pays a dividend while CUB 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.
Compare ARES vs APO
APO is one of the most direct listed alternatives to ARES.
Compare CUB vs BN
BN overlaps with CUB in an adjacent operating segment worth comparing.
Expand With APO + KKR
APO and KKR are the strongest missing peers across the current compare set.