Leisure
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
ESCA vs AMZN vs KO vs JPM vs MSFT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Specialty Retail
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Banks - Diversified
Software - Infrastructure
ESCA vs AMZN vs KO vs JPM vs MSFT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Leisure | Specialty Retail | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Banks - Diversified | Software - Infrastructure |
| Market Cap | $256M | $2.57T | $355.61B | $896.00B | $2.90T |
| Revenue (TTM) | $240M | $742.78B | $49.28B | $280.33B | $318.27B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $15M | $90.80B | $13.70B | $57.05B | $125.22B |
| Gross Margin | 27.1% | 50.6% | 61.7% | 60.0% | 68.3% |
| Operating Margin | 8.7% | 11.5% | 29.3% | 25.9% | 46.8% |
| Forward P/E | 17.3x | 27.1x | 25.3x | 14.4x | 23.3x |
| Total Debt | $20M | $152.99B | $45.49B | $942.38B | $112.18B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $12M | $86.81B | $10.27B | $343.34B | $30.24B |
ESCA vs AMZN vs KO vs JPM vs MSFT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Escalade, Incorpora… (ESCA) | 100 | 133.5 | +33.5% |
| Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) | 100 | 172.9 | +72.9% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 184.9 | +84.9% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 341.0 | +241.0% |
| Microsoft Corporati… (MSFT) | 100 | 192.0 | +92.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ESCA vs AMZN vs KO vs JPM vs MSFT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ESCA 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 0.87, yield 3.2%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.87, Low D/E 11.4%, current ratio 4.28x
- Beta 0.87, yield 3.2%, current ratio 4.28x
- 3.2% yield, vs KO's 2.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
AMZN lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
Among these 5 stocks, KO doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
JPM ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.81 vs KO's 2.26
- Lower P/E (14.4x vs 23.3x), PEG 0.81 vs 1.24
MSFT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 14.9%, EPS growth 15.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 12.4%
- 7.3% 10Y total return vs JPM's 465.8%
- 14.9% revenue growth vs ESCA's -4.5%
- 39.3% margin vs ESCA's 6.4%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 14.9% revenue growth vs ESCA's -4.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (14.4x vs 23.3x), PEG 0.81 vs 1.24 | |
| Quality / Margins | 39.3% margin vs ESCA's 6.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.84 vs AMZN's 1.43, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.2% yield, vs KO's 2.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +33.2% vs MSFT's -17.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 19.2% ROA vs JPM's 1.3%, ROIC 24.9% vs 4.5% |
ESCA vs AMZN vs KO vs JPM vs MSFT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
ESCA vs AMZN vs KO vs JPM vs MSFT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
JPM leads in 2 of 6 categories
MSFT leads 1 • KO leads 1 • ESCA leads 0 • AMZN leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MSFT leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AMZN is the larger business by revenue, generating $742.8B annually — 3088.9x ESCA's $240M. MSFT is the more profitable business, keeping 39.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ESCA's 6.4%. On growth, MSFT holds the edge at +18.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $240M | $742.8B | $49.3B | $280.3B | $318.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $25M | $155.9B | $15.5B | $81.4B | $192.6B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $15M | $90.8B | $13.7B | $57.0B | $125.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $31M | -$2.5B | $12.6B | $100.9B | $72.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +27.1% | +50.6% | +61.7% | +60.0% | +68.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +8.7% | +11.5% | +29.3% | +25.9% | +46.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +6.4% | +12.2% | +27.8% | +20.4% | +39.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +12.7% | -0.3% | +25.5% | +36.0% | +22.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +0.6% | +16.6% | +12.1% | — | +18.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +63.2% | +74.8% | +18.2% | +16.0% | +23.4% |
Valuation Metrics
JPM leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 16.0x trailing earnings, JPM trades at a 52% valuation discount to AMZN's 33.3x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), JPM offers better value at 0.90x vs KO's 2.43x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $256M | $2.57T | $355.6B | $896.0B | $2.90T |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $264M | $2.63T | $390.8B | $1.50T | $2.98T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 18.82x | 33.27x | 27.18x | 16.00x | 28.65x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 17.25x | 27.13x | 25.27x | 14.40x | 23.25x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.19x | 2.43x | 0.90x | 1.52x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 11.11x | 18.06x | 26.39x | 18.36x | 18.35x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.07x | 3.58x | 7.42x | 3.20x | 10.30x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.49x | 6.28x | 10.40x | 2.47x | 8.49x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 9.00x | 333.39x | 67.15x | 8.88x | 40.53x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — ESCA and MSFT each lead in 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
KO delivers a 41.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $41 in annual profit, vs $9 for ESCA. ESCA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.11x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to JPM's 2.60x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ESCA scores 8/9 vs JPM's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +9.0% | +23.3% | +41.1% | +15.9% | +33.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +6.9% | +11.5% | +13.1% | +1.3% | +19.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.5% | +14.7% | +15.8% | +4.5% | +24.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +9.8% | +15.3% | +17.3% | +8.9% | +29.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.11x | 0.37x | 1.33x | 2.60x | 0.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $8M | $66.2B | $35.2B | $599.0B | $81.9B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $12M | $86.8B | $10.3B | $343.3B | $30.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $20M | $153.0B | $45.5B | $942.4B | $112.2B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 37.31x | 39.96x | 10.70x | 0.74x | 55.65x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
JPM 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 $21,820 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $9,137 for ESCA. Over the past 12 months, ESCA leads with a +33.2% total return vs MSFT's -17.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors JPM at 33.6% vs MSFT's 6.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +38.3% | +5.3% | +20.3% | -0.5% | -17.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +33.2% | +11.9% | +17.2% | +21.8% | -17.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +49.9% | +88.5% | +47.0% | +138.2% | +20.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -8.6% | +41.0% | +65.6% | +118.2% | +56.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +136.9% | +567.1% | +121.1% | +465.8% | +727.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +14.4% | +23.5% | +13.7% | +33.6% | +6.5% |
Risk & Volatility
KO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
KO is the less volatile stock with a -0.20 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than AMZN's 1.43 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. KO currently trades 98.3% from its 52-week high vs MSFT's 70.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.87x | 1.43x | -0.20x | 0.94x | 0.84x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $21.32 | $278.56 | $84.04 | $337.25 | $555.45 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $11.41 | $197.28 | $65.35 | $262.71 | $356.28 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +87.4% | +85.6% | +98.3% | +95.1% | +70.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 50.5 | 36.8 | 60.6 | 59.1 | 36.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 35K | 42.9M | 12.7M | 7.0M | 33.7M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — ESCA and KO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ESCA as "Buy", AMZN as "Buy", KO as "Buy", JPM as "Buy", MSFT as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 41.3% upside for MSFT (target: $552) vs 4.2% for KO (target: $86). For income investors, ESCA offers the higher dividend yield at 3.21% vs MSFT's 0.83%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $307.77 | $86.13 | $339.75 | $551.96 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 5 | 94 | 48 | 61 | 82 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +3.2% | — | +2.5% | +1.9% | +0.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | — | 56 | 15 | 21 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.60 | — | $2.04 | $5.95 | $3.23 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.2% | 0.0% | +0.2% | +3.9% | +0.6% |
JPM leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Total Returns). MSFT leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 2 tied.
ESCA vs AMZN vs KO vs JPM vs MSFT: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ESCA or AMZN or KO or JPM or MSFT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the stronger pick with 14.
9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -4. 5% for Escalade, Incorporated (ESCA). JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) offers the better valuation at 16. 0x trailing P/E (14. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Escalade, Incorporated (ESCA) 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 — ESCA or AMZN or KO or JPM or MSFT?
On trailing P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the cheapest at 16. 0x versus Amazon. com, Inc. at 33. 3x. On forward P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co. is actually cheaper at 14. 4x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: JPMorgan Chase & Co. wins at 0. 81x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 26x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ESCA or AMZN or KO or JPM or MSFT?
Over the past 5 years, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) delivered a total return of +118. 2%, compared to -8. 6% for Escalade, Incorporated (ESCA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MSFT returned +727. 4% versus KO's +121. 1%. 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 — ESCA or AMZN or KO or JPM or MSFT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
20β versus Amazon. com, Inc. 's 1. 43β — meaning AMZN is approximately -813% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Escalade, Incorporated (ESCA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 11% versus 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ESCA or AMZN or KO or JPM or MSFT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is pulling ahead at 14.
9% versus -4. 5% for Escalade, Incorporated (ESCA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Amazon. com, Inc. grew EPS 29. 7% year-over-year, compared to 1. 5% for JPMorgan Chase & Co.. Over a 3-year CAGR, MSFT leads at 12. 4% 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 — ESCA or AMZN or KO or JPM or MSFT?
Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the more profitable company, earning 36.
1% net margin versus 5. 7% for Escalade, Incorporated — meaning it keeps 36. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MSFT leads at 45. 6% versus 7. 8% for ESCA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MSFT leads at 68. 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 ESCA or AMZN or KO or JPM or MSFT 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, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 81x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 26x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) trades at 14. 4x forward P/E versus 27. 1x for Amazon. com, Inc. — 12. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MSFT: 41. 3% to $551. 96.
08Which pays a better dividend — ESCA or AMZN or KO or JPM or MSFT?
In this comparison, ESCA (3.
2% yield), KO (2. 5% yield), JPM (1. 9% yield), MSFT (0. 8% yield) pay a dividend. AMZN does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is ESCA or AMZN or KO or JPM or MSFT better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
20), 2. 5% yield, +121. 1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (KO: +121. 1%, AMZN: +567. 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 ESCA and AMZN and KO and JPM and MSFT?
These companies operate in different sectors (ESCA (Consumer Cyclical) and AMZN (Consumer Cyclical) and KO (Consumer Defensive) and JPM (Financial Services) and MSFT (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: ESCA is a small-cap income-oriented stock; AMZN is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock; MSFT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock. ESCA, KO, JPM, MSFT pay a dividend while AMZN 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.