Asset Management
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
ECCV vs BX vs KKR vs APO vs ARES
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Asset Management
Asset Management
Asset Management - Global
Asset Management
ECCV vs BX vs KKR vs APO vs ARES — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Asset Management | Asset Management | Asset Management | Asset Management - Global | Asset Management |
| Market Cap | $2.24B | $95.85B | $89.45B | $73.67B | $40.44B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $116M | $13.83B | $19.26B | $30.30B | $6.47B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $34M | $3.02B | $2.37B | $4.48B | $527M |
| Gross Margin | 84.2% | 86.0% | 41.8% | 88.5% | 74.8% |
| Operating Margin | 73.7% | 51.9% | 2.4% | 34.4% | 27.2% |
| Forward P/E | 27.9x | 20.5x | 16.4x | 14.4x | 20.2x |
| Total Debt | $272M | $13.31B | $54.77B | $13.36B | $14.91B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $42M | $2.63B | $6M | $19.24B | $1.50B |
ECCV vs BX vs KKR vs APO vs ARES — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jan 22 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Eagle Point Credit … (ECCV) | 100 | 99.1 | -0.9% |
| Blackstone Inc. (BX) | 100 | 93.8 | -6.2% |
| KKR & Co. Inc. (KKR) | 100 | 144.1 | +44.1% |
| Apollo Global Manag… (APO) | 100 | 183.9 | +83.9% |
| Ares Management Cor… (ARES) | 100 | 158.4 | +58.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ECCV vs BX vs KKR vs APO vs ARES
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ECCV carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.55, yield 7.3%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.55, Low D/E 29.0%, current ratio 2.22x
- Beta 0.55, yield 7.3%, current ratio 2.22x
- NIM 10.2% vs KKR's 0.0%
BX is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 21.6%, EPS growth 7.2%
Among these 5 stocks, KKR doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
APO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if valuation efficiency is your priority.
- PEG 0.19 vs ARES's 1.15
- Lower P/E (14.4x vs 20.2x), PEG 0.19 vs 1.15
ARES ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding.
- 9.3% 10Y total return vs APO's 7.6%
- 66.6% NII/revenue growth vs ECCV's -14.9%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 66.6% NII/revenue growth vs ECCV's -14.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (14.4x vs 20.2x), PEG 0.19 vs 1.15 | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs APO's 0.5% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.55 vs KKR's 1.70, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 7.3% yield, vs ARES's 6.6% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +11.4% vs ARES's -21.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs APO's 0.5% |
ECCV vs BX vs KKR vs APO vs ARES — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
ECCV vs BX vs KKR vs APO vs ARES — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ECCV leads in 2 of 6 categories
APO leads 1 • BX leads 1 • KKR leads 0 • ARES leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ECCV leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
APO is the larger business by revenue, generating $30.3B annually — 261.3x ECCV's $116M. ECCV is the more profitable business, keeping 69.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ARES's 8.2%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $116M | $13.8B | $19.3B | $30.3B | $6.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $63M | $7.2B | $9.0B | $11.5B | $1.8B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $34M | $3.0B | $2.4B | $4.5B | $527M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $65M | $3.5B | $7.5B | $5.4B | $1.5B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +84.2% | +86.0% | +41.8% | +88.5% | +74.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +73.7% | +51.9% | +2.4% | +34.4% | +27.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +69.3% | +21.8% | +12.3% | +14.8% | +8.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +89.3% | +12.6% | +49.4% | +24.6% | +23.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +3.9% | +41.3% | -1.7% | +16.3% | -80.9% |
Valuation Metrics
APO leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 17.6x trailing earnings, APO trades at a 72% valuation discount to ARES's 62.8x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), APO offers better value at 0.23x vs ARES's 3.56x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.2B | $95.8B | $89.4B | $73.7B | $40.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.5B | $106.5B | $144.2B | $67.8B | $53.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 27.88x | 31.53x | 42.88x | 17.60x | 62.83x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 20.50x | 16.42x | 14.42x | 20.23x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.51x | — | 0.23x | 3.56x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 28.88x | 14.77x | 20.24x | 5.92x | 26.88x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 19.31x | 6.93x | 4.64x | 2.43x | 6.25x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.39x | 4.37x | 1.17x | 1.83x | 3.08x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 21.63x | 54.93x | 9.39x | 9.89x | 26.19x |
Profitability & Efficiency
BX leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
BX delivers a 14.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $14 in annual profit, vs $3 for ECCV. ECCV carries lower financial leverage with a 0.29x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to ARES's 1.71x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ARES scores 8/9 vs APO's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +3.1% | +14.3% | +3.2% | +12.1% | +6.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +2.2% | +6.5% | +0.6% | +1.0% | +1.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +6.1% | +16.1% | +0.3% | +16.0% | +6.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +7.1% | +16.9% | +0.1% | +8.8% | +7.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 5 | 6 | 3 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.29x | 0.61x | 0.67x | 0.31x | 1.71x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $230M | $10.7B | $54.8B | -$5.9B | $13.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $42M | $2.6B | $6M | $19.2B | $1.5B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $272M | $13.3B | $54.8B | $13.4B | $14.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 12.34x | 14.12x | 3.29x | 28.98x | 2.68x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — ECCV and APO and ARES each lead in 2 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 $12,020 for ECCV. Over the past 12 months, ECCV leads with a +11.4% total return vs ARES's -21.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors APO at 29.2% vs ECCV's 8.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +2.5% | -21.3% | -22.0% | -12.5% | -25.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +11.4% | -6.5% | -13.0% | +0.4% | -21.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +29.1% | +65.9% | +107.7% | +115.8% | +64.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +20.2% | +59.0% | +76.5% | +135.1% | +160.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +20.2% | +476.1% | +715.5% | +759.2% | +929.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +8.9% | +18.4% | +27.6% | +29.2% | +18.1% |
Risk & Volatility
ECCV leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ECCV is the less volatile stock with a 0.55 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than KKR's 1.70 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ECCV currently trades 98.4% 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 | 0.55x | 1.53x | 1.70x | 1.43x | 1.62x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $24.37 | $190.09 | $153.87 | $157.28 | $195.26 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $7.45 | $101.73 | $82.67 | $99.56 | $95.80 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +98.4% | +64.3% | +65.2% | +81.3% | +63.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 62.7 | 54.8 | 52.4 | 64.9 | 63.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 7K | 7.1M | 6.5M | 5.2M | 3.7M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — ECCV and ARES each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: BX as "Buy", KKR as "Buy", APO as "Buy", ARES as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 44.0% upside for ARES (target: $177) vs 23.1% for APO (target: $157). For income investors, ECCV offers the higher dividend yield at 7.32% vs KKR's 0.80%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $156.29 | $143.00 | $157.25 | $177.38 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 29 | 26 | 28 | 22 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +7.3% | +6.3% | +0.8% | +1.7% | +6.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 2 | 6 | 3 | 7 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.75 | $7.70 | $0.80 | $2.14 | $8.08 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.3% | +0.1% | +1.0% | 0.0% |
ECCV leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Risk & Volatility). APO leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
ECCV vs BX vs KKR vs APO vs ARES: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ECCV or BX or KKR or APO 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 -14. 9% for Eagle Point Credit Company Inc. (ECCV). Apollo Global Management, Inc. (APO) offers the better valuation at 17. 6x trailing P/E (14. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Blackstone Inc. (BX) a "Buy" — based on 29 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 — ECCV or BX or KKR or APO or ARES?
On trailing P/E, Apollo Global Management, Inc.
(APO) is the cheapest at 17. 6x versus Ares Management Corporation at 62. 8x. On forward P/E, Apollo Global Management, Inc. is actually cheaper at 14. 4x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Apollo Global Management, Inc. wins at 0. 19x 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 — ECCV or BX or KKR or APO or ARES?
Over the past 5 years, Ares Management Corporation (ARES) delivered a total return of +160.
2%, compared to +20. 2% for Eagle Point Credit Company Inc. (ECCV). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ARES returned +951. 4% versus ECCV's +20. 4%. 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 — ECCV or BX or KKR or APO or ARES?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Eagle Point Credit Company Inc.
(ECCV) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 55β versus KKR & Co. Inc. 's 1. 70β — meaning KKR is approximately 210% more volatile than ECCV relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Eagle Point Credit Company Inc. (ECCV) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 29% versus 171% for Ares Management Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ECCV or BX or KKR or APO or ARES?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Ares Management Corporation (ARES) is pulling ahead at 66.
6% versus -14. 9% for Eagle Point Credit Company Inc. (ECCV). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Blackstone Inc. grew EPS 7. 2% year-over-year, compared to -50. 6% for Eagle Point Credit Company 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 — ECCV or BX or KKR or APO or ARES?
Eagle Point Credit Company Inc.
(ECCV) is the more profitable company, earning 69. 3% net margin versus 8. 2% for Ares Management Corporation — meaning it keeps 69. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ECCV leads at 73. 7% versus 2. 4% for KKR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — APO leads at 88. 5%, 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 ECCV or BX or KKR or APO 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, Apollo Global Management, Inc. (APO) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 19x 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, Apollo Global Management, Inc. (APO) trades at 14. 4x forward P/E versus 20. 5x for Blackstone Inc. — 6. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ARES: 44. 0% to $177. 38.
08Which pays a better dividend — ECCV or BX or KKR or APO or ARES?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Eagle Point Credit Company Inc. (ECCV) offers the highest yield at 7. 3%, versus 0. 8% for KKR & Co. Inc. (KKR).
09Is ECCV or BX or KKR or APO or ARES better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Eagle Point Credit Company Inc.
(ECCV) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 55), 7. 3% yield). Blackstone Inc. (BX) carries a higher beta of 1. 53 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ECCV: +20. 4%, BX: +476. 1%), 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 ECCV and BX and KKR and APO 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: ECCV is a small-cap income-oriented stock; BX is a mid-cap high-growth stock; KKR is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; APO is a mid-cap high-growth stock; ARES is a mid-cap high-growth stock. 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.