Financial - Conglomerates
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
FSHPR vs EVR vs LAZ vs PJT vs MC
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Capital Markets
Financial - Capital Markets
Financial - Capital Markets
Financial - Capital Markets
FSHPR vs EVR vs LAZ vs PJT vs MC — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Financial - Conglomerates | Financial - Capital Markets | Financial - Capital Markets | Financial - Capital Markets | Financial - Capital Markets |
| Market Cap | $157K | $13.11B | $4.36B | $3.70B | $4.69B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $3.88B | $3.19B | $1.71B | $1.52B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $910K | $592M | $237M | $187M | $233M |
| Gross Margin | — | 99.4% | 31.8% | 32.4% | 99.2% |
| Operating Margin | — | 20.5% | 13.0% | 21.2% | 18.1% |
| Forward P/E | 0.3x | 17.5x | 14.5x | 20.5x | 20.8x |
| Total Debt | $0.00 | $1.16B | $2.58B | $414M | $267M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $77K | $1.47B | $1.50B | $539M | $509M |
FSHPR vs EVR vs LAZ vs PJT vs MC — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Aug 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Flag Ship Acquisiti… (FSHPR) | 100 | 57.9 | -42.1% |
| Evercore Inc. (EVR) | 100 | 121.5 | +21.5% |
| Lazard Ltd (LAZ) | 100 | 84.8 | -15.2% |
| PJT Partners Inc. (PJT) | 100 | 125.2 | +25.2% |
| Moelis & Company (MC) | 100 | 97.4 | -2.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: FSHPR vs EVR vs LAZ vs PJT vs MC
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
FSHPR carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 1.07, yield 100.0%
- Beta 1.07, yield 100.0%, current ratio 0.24x
- Lower P/E (0.3x vs 20.8x)
- Beta 1.07 vs EVR's 1.90
EVR is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 29.5%, EPS growth 54.7%
- 6.1% 10Y total return vs PJT's 6.0%
- PEG 1.55 vs PJT's 2.36
- 29.5% NII/revenue growth vs LAZ's 3.2%
LAZ lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
PJT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.10, Low D/E 41.0%, current ratio 27.67x
- Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs MC's 0.8% (lower = leaner)
- Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs MC's 0.8%
Among these 5 stocks, MC doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 29.5% NII/revenue growth vs LAZ's 3.2% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (0.3x vs 20.8x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs MC's 0.8% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.07 vs EVR's 1.90 | |
| Dividends | 100.0% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs PJT's 0.6% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +60.9% vs FSHPR's -39.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs MC's 0.8% |
FSHPR vs EVR vs LAZ vs PJT vs MC — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
FSHPR vs EVR vs LAZ vs PJT vs MC — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
PJT leads in 1 of 6 categories
MC leads 1 • EVR leads 1 • FSHPR leads 1 • LAZ leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — EVR and MC each lead in 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
EVR and FSHPR operate at a comparable scale, with $3.9B and $0 in trailing revenue. MC is the more profitable business, keeping 15.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to LAZ's 7.4%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $3.9B | $3.2B | $1.7B | $1.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | — | $804M | $384M | $412M | $286M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | — | $592M | $237M | $187M | $233M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | — | $1.2B | $519M | $614M | $540M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +99.4% | +31.8% | +32.4% | +99.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | +20.5% | +13.0% | +21.2% | +18.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | +15.3% | +7.4% | +10.5% | +15.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | +30.5% | +15.9% | +28.0% | +35.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +44.2% | -43.8% | +11.1% | -4.3% |
Valuation Metrics
PJT leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 0.3x trailing earnings, FSHPR trades at a 99% valuation discount to EVR's 23.6x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), EVR offers better value at 2.08x vs PJT's 2.63x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $156,844 | $13.1B | $4.4B | $3.7B | $4.7B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $80,097 | $12.8B | $5.4B | $3.6B | $4.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 0.32x | 23.56x | 21.40x | 22.93x | 21.74x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 17.50x | 14.52x | 20.52x | 20.83x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.08x | — | 2.63x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 15.91x | 12.09x | 9.08x | 15.58x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 3.38x | 1.37x | 2.16x | 3.09x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 6.33x | 4.99x | 4.34x | 7.44x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 11.09x | 8.63x | 7.71x | 8.69x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MC leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MC delivers a 37.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $38 in annual profit, vs $20 for PJT. MC carries lower financial leverage with a 0.39x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to LAZ's 2.61x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), PJT scores 7/9 vs FSHPR's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | +29.3% | +26.7% | +20.1% | +37.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +2.6% | +14.1% | +5.2% | +11.1% | +15.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | +18.8% | +9.5% | +20.3% | +24.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | — | +17.6% | +9.5% | +21.2% | +22.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 6 | 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.50x | 2.61x | 0.41x | 0.39x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$76,747 | -$311M | $1.1B | -$125M | -$241M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $76,747 | $1.5B | $1.5B | $539M | $509M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $0 | $1.2B | $2.6B | $414M | $267M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 32.72x | 4.74x | — | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
EVR leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in EVR five years ago would be worth $23,623 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,658 for FSHPR. Over the past 12 months, EVR leads with a +60.9% total return vs FSHPR's -39.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors EVR at 46.8% vs FSHPR's -12.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -45.1% | -5.5% | -5.6% | -9.5% | -9.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -39.1% | +60.9% | +17.8% | +8.3% | +24.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -33.4% | +216.3% | +80.2% | +152.7% | +104.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -33.4% | +136.2% | +20.6% | +122.3% | +50.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -33.4% | +613.3% | +100.4% | +600.7% | +262.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -12.7% | +46.8% | +21.7% | +36.2% | +26.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — EVR and PJT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
FSHPR is the less volatile stock with a 1.07 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than EVR's 1.90 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. EVR currently trades 85.2% from its 52-week high vs FSHPR's 36.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.25x | 1.90x | 1.79x | 1.08x | 1.72x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $0.22 | $388.71 | $58.75 | $195.62 | $78.22 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.00 | $206.63 | $38.67 | $127.73 | $51.06 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +36.5% | +85.2% | +79.0% | +78.3% | +81.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 46.7 | 53.0 | 50.9 | 51.2 | 49.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 2K | 622K | 1.5M | 364K | 1.3M |
Analyst Outlook
FSHPR leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: EVR as "Buy", LAZ as "Buy", PJT as "Hold", MC as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 15.6% upside for EVR (target: $383) vs 1.9% for LAZ (target: $47). For income investors, FSHPR offers the higher dividend yield at 100.00% vs PJT's 0.56%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $382.67 | $47.33 | $158.67 | $73.40 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 21 | 29 | 12 | 22 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +100.0% | +1.0% | +3.8% | +0.6% | +4.1% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.49 | $3.25 | $1.75 | $0.86 | $2.63 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +5.0% | +2.1% | +5.3% | +1.6% |
PJT leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). MC leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 2 tied.
FSHPR vs EVR vs LAZ vs PJT vs MC: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is FSHPR or EVR or LAZ or PJT or MC a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Evercore Inc.
(EVR) is the stronger pick with 29. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 2% for Lazard Ltd (LAZ). Flag Ship Acquisition Corporation (FSHPR) offers the better valuation at 0. 3x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Evercore Inc. (EVR) a "Buy" — based on 21 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 — FSHPR or EVR or LAZ or PJT or MC?
On trailing P/E, Flag Ship Acquisition Corporation (FSHPR) is the cheapest at 0.
3x versus Evercore Inc. at 23. 6x. On forward P/E, Lazard Ltd is actually cheaper at 14. 5x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Evercore Inc. wins at 1. 55x versus PJT Partners Inc. 's 2. 36x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — FSHPR or EVR or LAZ or PJT or MC?
Over the past 5 years, Evercore Inc.
(EVR) delivered a total return of +136. 2%, compared to -33. 4% for Flag Ship Acquisition Corporation (FSHPR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: EVR returned +613. 3% versus FSHPR's -32. 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 — FSHPR or EVR or LAZ or PJT or MC?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), PJT Partners Inc.
(PJT) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 08β versus Evercore Inc. 's 1. 90β — meaning EVR is approximately 77% more volatile than PJT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Moelis & Company (MC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 39% versus 3% for Lazard Ltd — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — FSHPR or EVR or LAZ or PJT or MC?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Evercore Inc.
(EVR) is pulling ahead at 29. 5% versus 3. 2% for Lazard Ltd (LAZ). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Flag Ship Acquisition Corporation grew EPS 947. 5% year-over-year, compared to -19. 0% for Lazard Ltd. 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 — FSHPR or EVR or LAZ or PJT or MC?
Moelis & Company (MC) is the more profitable company, earning 15.
4% net margin versus 0. 0% for Flag Ship Acquisition Corporation — meaning it keeps 15. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: PJT leads at 21. 2% versus 0. 0% for FSHPR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — EVR leads at 99. 4%, 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 FSHPR or EVR or LAZ or PJT or MC 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, Evercore Inc. (EVR) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 55x versus PJT Partners Inc. 's 2. 36x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Lazard Ltd (LAZ) trades at 14. 5x forward P/E versus 20. 8x for Moelis & Company — 6. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for EVR: 15. 6% to $382. 67.
08Which pays a better dividend — FSHPR or EVR or LAZ or PJT or MC?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Flag Ship Acquisition Corporation (FSHPR) offers the highest yield at 100. 0%, versus 0. 6% for PJT Partners Inc. (PJT).
09Is FSHPR or EVR or LAZ or PJT or MC better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, PJT Partners Inc.
(PJT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 08), 0. 6% yield, +607. 0% 10Y return). Lazard Ltd (LAZ) carries a higher beta of 1. 79 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (PJT: +607. 0%, LAZ: +100. 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 FSHPR and EVR and LAZ and PJT and MC?
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: FSHPR is a small-cap deep-value stock; EVR is a mid-cap high-growth stock; LAZ is a small-cap income-oriented stock; PJT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MC is a small-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.