Shell Companies
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
FTII vs EVR vs LAZ vs MC
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Capital Markets
Financial - Capital Markets
Financial - Capital Markets
FTII vs EVR vs LAZ vs MC — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Shell Companies | Financial - Capital Markets | Financial - Capital Markets | Financial - Capital Markets |
| Market Cap | $42M | $13.51B | $4.52B | $4.78B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $3.88B | $3.19B | $1.52B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-1M | $592M | $237M | $233M |
| Gross Margin | — | 99.4% | 31.8% | 99.2% |
| Operating Margin | — | 20.5% | 13.0% | 18.1% |
| Forward P/E | 66.8x | 17.8x | 16.2x | 21.1x |
| Total Debt | $4M | $1.16B | $2.58B | $267M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $57K | $1.47B | $1.50B | $509M |
FTII vs EVR vs LAZ vs MC — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Apr 22 | Apr 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| FutureTech II Acqui… (FTII) | 100 | 120.0 | +20.0% |
| Evercore Inc. (EVR) | 100 | 292.0 | +192.0% |
| Lazard Ltd (LAZ) | 100 | 154.4 | +54.4% |
| Moelis & Company (MC) | 100 | 134.1 | +34.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: FTII vs EVR vs LAZ vs MC
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
FTII is the clearest fit if your priority is stability.
- Beta 0.10 vs EVR's 1.88
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%
- 6.3% 10Y total return vs MC's 266.8%
- 29.5% NII/revenue growth vs FTII's -72.3%
- +59.0% vs FTII's +9.1%
LAZ carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for value and quality.
- Lower P/E (16.2x vs 17.8x)
- Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs MC's 0.8% (lower = leaner)
- Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs MC's 0.8%
MC is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 1.72, yield 4.0%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.72, Low D/E 39.3%, current ratio 21.47x
- Beta 1.72, yield 4.0%, current ratio 21.47x
- 4.0% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs EVR's 1.0%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 29.5% NII/revenue growth vs FTII's -72.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (16.2x vs 17.8x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs MC's 0.8% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.10 vs EVR's 1.88 | |
| Dividends | 4.0% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs EVR's 1.0%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +59.0% vs FTII's +9.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs MC's 0.8% |
FTII vs EVR vs LAZ 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.
FTII vs EVR vs LAZ vs MC — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
EVR leads in 2 of 6 categories
MC leads 2 • LAZ leads 1 • FTII leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
EVR leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
EVR and FTII 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 | $1.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$2M | $804M | $384M | $286M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$1M | $592M | $237M | $233M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$3M | $1.2B | $519M | $540M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +99.4% | +31.8% | +99.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | +20.5% | +13.0% | +18.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | +15.3% | +7.4% | +15.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | +30.5% | +15.9% | +35.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +44.2% | -43.8% | -4.3% |
Valuation Metrics
LAZ leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 22.1x trailing earnings, MC trades at a 67% valuation discount to FTII's 66.8x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, LAZ's 12.4x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than EVR's 16.4x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $42M | $13.5B | $4.5B | $4.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $46M | $13.2B | $5.6B | $4.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 66.78x | 24.28x | 22.16x | 22.14x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 17.78x | 16.18x | 21.09x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.15x | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 16.41x | 12.43x | 15.88x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 3.48x | 1.42x | 3.15x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 134.89x | 6.53x | 5.17x | 7.58x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 11.43x | 8.94x | 8.85x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MC leads this category, winning 6 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 $-6 for FTII. MC carries lower financial leverage with a 0.39x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to FTII's 17.47x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), EVR scores 6/9 vs FTII's 1/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -6.0% | +29.3% | +26.7% | +37.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -11.4% | +14.1% | +5.2% | +15.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | +18.8% | +9.5% | +24.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | — | +17.6% | +9.5% | +22.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 6 | 5 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 17.47x | 0.50x | 2.61x | 0.39x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $4M | -$311M | $1.1B | -$241M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $56,768 | $1.5B | $1.5B | $509M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $4M | $1.2B | $2.6B | $267M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 32.72x | 4.74x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
EVR leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in EVR five years ago would be worth $24,787 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $12,068 for FTII. Over the past 12 months, EVR leads with a +59.0% total return vs FTII's +9.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors EVR at 48.2% vs FTII's 4.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | 0.0% | -2.6% | -2.3% | -7.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +9.1% | +59.0% | +15.3% | +21.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +14.4% | +225.7% | +85.9% | +107.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +20.7% | +147.9% | +24.8% | +50.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +20.7% | +633.6% | +105.3% | +266.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +4.6% | +48.2% | +23.0% | +27.5% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — FTII and EVR each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
FTII is the less volatile stock with a 0.10 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than EVR's 1.88 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. EVR currently trades 87.8% from its 52-week high vs LAZ's 81.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.10x | 1.88x | 1.78x | 1.72x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $14.00 | $388.71 | $58.75 | $78.22 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $11.02 | $210.60 | $38.67 | $51.06 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +85.9% | +87.8% | +81.8% | +83.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 38.7 | 51.3 | 50.6 | 49.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 28 | 624K | 1.5M | 1.3M |
Analyst Outlook
MC leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: EVR as "Buy", LAZ as "Buy", MC as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 12.8% upside for MC (target: $73) vs 0.9% for LAZ (target: $49). For income investors, MC offers the higher dividend yield at 4.05% vs EVR's 0.95%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $382.67 | $48.50 | $73.40 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 21 | 29 | 22 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.0% | +3.6% | +4.0% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $3.25 | $1.75 | $2.63 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +86.0% | +4.9% | +2.0% | +1.6% |
EVR leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). MC leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
FTII vs EVR vs LAZ vs MC: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is FTII or EVR or LAZ 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). Moelis & Company (MC) offers the better valuation at 22. 1x trailing P/E (21. 1x forward), 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 — FTII or EVR or LAZ or MC?
On trailing P/E, Moelis & Company (MC) is the cheapest at 22.
1x versus FutureTech II Acquisition Corp. at 66. 8x. On forward P/E, Lazard Ltd is actually cheaper at 16. 2x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — FTII or EVR or LAZ or MC?
Over the past 5 years, Evercore Inc.
(EVR) delivered a total return of +147. 9%, compared to +20. 7% for FutureTech II Acquisition Corp. (FTII). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: EVR returned +633. 6% versus FTII's +20. 7%. 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 — FTII or EVR or LAZ or MC?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), FutureTech II Acquisition Corp.
(FTII) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 10β versus Evercore Inc. 's 1. 88β — meaning EVR is approximately 1863% more volatile than FTII relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Moelis & Company (MC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 39% versus 17% for FutureTech II Acquisition Corp. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — FTII or EVR or LAZ 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: Moelis & Company grew EPS 65. 2% year-over-year, compared to -21. 7% for FutureTech II Acquisition Corp.. 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 — FTII or EVR or LAZ or MC?
Moelis & Company (MC) is the more profitable company, earning 15.
4% net margin versus 0. 0% for FutureTech II Acquisition Corp. — meaning it keeps 15. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: EVR leads at 20. 5% versus 0. 0% for FTII. 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 FTII or EVR or LAZ or MC more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Lazard Ltd (LAZ) trades at 16.
2x forward P/E versus 21. 1x for Moelis & Company — 4. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MC: 12. 8% to $73. 40.
08Which pays a better dividend — FTII or EVR or LAZ or MC?
In this comparison, MC (4.
0% yield), LAZ (3. 6% yield), EVR (1. 0% yield) pay a dividend. FTII does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is FTII or EVR or LAZ or MC better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, FutureTech II Acquisition Corp.
(FTII) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 10)). Lazard Ltd (LAZ) carries a higher beta of 1. 78 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (FTII: +20. 7%, LAZ: +105. 3%), 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 FTII and EVR and LAZ 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: FTII is a small-cap quality compounder stock; EVR is a mid-cap high-growth stock; LAZ is a small-cap income-oriented stock; MC is a small-cap high-growth stock. EVR, LAZ, MC pay a dividend while FTII 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 all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.