FTLF vs WMT vs COST vs AMZN

For growth investors, FitLife Brands, Inc.

(FTLF) is the stronger pick with 22. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 4. 7% for Walmart Inc. (WMT). FitLife Brands, Inc. (FTLF) offers the better valuation at 10. 5x trailing P/E (7. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate FitLife Brands, Inc. (FTLF) a "Buy" — based on 1 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.

On trailing P/E, FitLife Brands, Inc.

(FTLF) is the cheapest at 10. 5x versus Costco Wholesale Corporation at 55. 6x. On forward P/E, FitLife Brands, Inc. is actually cheaper at 7. 0x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: FitLife Brands, Inc. wins at 0. 27x versus Walmart Inc. 's 4. 07x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Walmart Inc.

(WMT) delivered a total return of +186. 9%, compared to +64. 8% for Amazon. com, Inc. (AMZN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AMZN returned +702. 2% versus FTLF's +175. 2%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

10β versus Amazon. com, Inc. 's 1. 50β — meaning AMZN is approximately 1416% more volatile than COST relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 28% versus 67% for Walmart Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), FitLife Brands, Inc.

(FTLF) is pulling ahead at 22. 3% versus 4. 7% for Walmart Inc. (WMT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: FitLife Brands, Inc. grew EPS 68. 1% year-over-year, compared to 10. 0% for Costco Wholesale Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, FTLF leads at 32. 2% 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.

FitLife Brands, Inc.

(FTLF) is the more profitable company, earning 13. 9% net margin versus 2. 9% for Costco Wholesale Corporation — meaning it keeps 13. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: FTLF leads at 20. 3% versus 3. 8% for COST. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — AMZN leads at 50. 3%, 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.

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, FitLife Brands, Inc. (FTLF) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 27x versus Walmart Inc. 's 4. 07x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, FitLife Brands, Inc. (FTLF) trades at 7. 0x forward P/E versus 49. 4x for Costco Wholesale Corporation — 42. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FTLF: 219. 0% to $30. 50.

In this comparison, WMT (0.

7% yield), COST (0. 5% yield) pay a dividend. FTLF, AMZN do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Walmart Inc.

(WMT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 11), 0. 7% yield, +501. 4% 10Y return). Amazon. com, Inc. (AMZN) carries a higher beta of 1. 50 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (WMT: +501. 4%, AMZN: +702. 2%), 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.

These companies operate in different sectors (FTLF (Consumer Defensive) and WMT (Consumer Defensive) and COST (Consumer Defensive) and AMZN (Consumer Cyclical)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

In terms of investment character: FTLF is a small-cap high-growth stock; WMT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; COST is a large-cap quality compounder stock; AMZN is a mega-cap quality compounder stock. WMT pays a dividend while FTLF, COST, AMZN do 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.