Shell Companies
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
FTW vs PSFE vs ACIC vs BN vs GS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Information Technology Services
Insurance - Property & Casualty
Asset Management
Financial - Capital Markets
FTW vs PSFE vs ACIC vs BN vs GS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Shell Companies | Information Technology Services | Insurance - Property & Casualty | Asset Management | Financial - Capital Markets |
| Market Cap | $328M | $485M | $525M | $104.40B | $287.62B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $1.70B | $335M | $77.66B | $126.85B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $7M | $-183M | $107M | $1.31B | $16.67B |
| Gross Margin | — | 52.4% | 63.8% | 40.0% | 41.1% |
| Operating Margin | — | 5.6% | 42.6% | 39.9% | 14.5% |
| Forward P/E | 48.0x | 4.3x | 7.3x | 16.7x | 15.6x |
| Total Debt | $0.00 | $2.66B | $152M | $263.42B | $616.93B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $973K | $1.35B | $199M | $16.24B | $182.09B |
FTW vs PSFE vs ACIC vs BN vs GS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Aug 24 | Mar 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| EQV Ventures Acquis… (FTW) | 100 | 111.1 | +11.1% |
| Paysafe Limited (PSFE) | 100 | 27.9 | -72.1% |
| American Coastal In… (ACIC) | 100 | 101.4 | +1.4% |
| Brookfield Corporat… (BN) | 100 | 130.8 | +30.8% |
| The Goldman Sachs G… (GS) | 100 | 168.5 | +68.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: FTW vs PSFE vs ACIC vs BN vs GS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
FTW ranks third and is worth considering specifically for defensive and bank quality.
- Beta 0.34, current ratio 1.51x
- NIM 1.9% vs GS's 0.5%
- Beta 0.34 vs PSFE's 2.35
PSFE is the clearest fit if your priority is value.
- Lower P/E (4.3x vs 15.6x)
ACIC is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Rev growth 13.1%, EPS growth 40.5%, 3Y rev CAGR 15.0%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.39, Low D/E 48.0%, current ratio 1.22x
- 31.9% margin vs PSFE's -10.7%
- 9.0% ROA vs PSFE's -3.8%, ROIC 41.0% vs 3.6%
Among these 5 stocks, BN doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
GS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 12 yrs, beta 1.47, yield 1.5%
- 5.3% 10Y total return vs BN's 308.9%
- 17.0% NII/revenue growth vs BN's -9.7%
- 1.5% yield; 12-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 17.0% NII/revenue growth vs BN's -9.7% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (4.3x vs 15.6x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 31.9% margin vs PSFE's -10.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.34 vs PSFE's 2.35 | |
| Dividends | 1.5% yield; 12-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +70.6% vs PSFE's -37.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 9.0% ROA vs PSFE's -3.8%, ROIC 41.0% vs 3.6% |
FTW vs PSFE vs ACIC vs BN vs GS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
FTW vs PSFE vs ACIC vs BN vs GS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ACIC leads in 2 of 6 categories
GS leads 2 • PSFE leads 1 • FTW leads 0 • BN leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ACIC leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
GS and FTW operate at a comparable scale, with $126.9B and $0 in trailing revenue. ACIC is the more profitable business, keeping 31.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PSFE's -10.7%. On growth, ACIC holds the edge at +9.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $1.7B | $335M | $77.7B | $126.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$9M | $371M | $154M | $32.1B | $23.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $7M | -$183M | $107M | $1.3B | $16.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$2M | $136M | $71M | -$2.8B | $15.8B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +52.4% | +63.8% | +40.0% | +41.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | +5.6% | +42.6% | +39.9% | +14.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | -10.7% | +31.9% | +1.7% | +11.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | +8.0% | +21.1% | — | -12.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +4.4% | +9.3% | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -170.0% | -183.3% | +4.3% | +73.1% | +45.8% |
Valuation Metrics
PSFE leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 5.0x trailing earnings, ACIC trades at a 100% valuation discount to BN's 9999.0x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, ACIC's 2.9x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than FTW's 47.7x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $328M | $485M | $525M | $104.4B | $287.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $327M | $1.8B | $478M | $351.6B | $722.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 48.04x | -2.99x | 5.05x | 9999.00x | 22.84x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 4.30x | 7.33x | 16.69x | 15.64x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | 1.63x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 47.69x | 4.53x | 2.93x | 8.53x | 34.75x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 0.29x | 1.56x | 1.34x | 2.27x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.95x | 0.83x | 1.70x | 0.66x | 2.53x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 2.17x | 7.40x | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
ACIC leads this category, winning 8 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ACIC delivers a 35.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $36 in annual profit, vs $-24 for PSFE. ACIC carries lower financial leverage with a 0.48x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to GS's 5.06x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ACIC scores 6/9 vs FTW's 3/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +2.0% | -24.1% | +35.7% | +0.8% | +12.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.9% | -3.8% | +9.0% | +0.3% | +0.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | +3.6% | +41.0% | +5.6% | +1.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -0.2% | +3.6% | +26.0% | +7.2% | +3.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 4 | 6 | 5 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 4.06x | 0.48x | 1.59x | 5.06x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$973,483 | $1.3B | -$46M | $247.2B | $434.8B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $973,483 | $1.3B | $199M | $16.2B | $182.1B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $0 | $2.7B | $152M | $263.4B | $616.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 0.84x | 14.20x | 1.64x | 0.31x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
GS leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in GS five years ago would be worth $26,440 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $582 for PSFE. Over the past 12 months, GS leads with a +70.6% total return vs PSFE's -37.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors GS at 43.5% vs PSFE's -13.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +6.3% | +17.7% | +1.9% | -0.1% | +1.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +7.4% | -37.1% | -0.3% | +25.5% | +70.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | — | -34.9% | +159.1% | +122.1% | +195.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | — | -94.2% | +107.0% | +89.3% | +164.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | — | -92.1% | -22.2% | +308.9% | +534.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | — | -13.3% | +37.3% | +30.5% | +43.5% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — FTW and GS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
FTW is the less volatile stock with a 0.34 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than PSFE's 2.35 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. GS currently trades 94.0% from its 52-week high vs PSFE's 56.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.34x | 2.35x | 0.39x | 1.57x | 1.47x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $13.75 | $16.49 | $13.06 | $49.57 | $984.70 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $10.21 | $5.95 | $9.79 | $36.47 | $547.74 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +80.4% | +56.9% | +83.1% | +93.8% | +94.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 51.8 | 65.3 | 31.0 | 62.5 | 59.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 44K | 361K | 188K | 5.9M | 2.0M |
Analyst Outlook
GS leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: PSFE as "Buy", ACIC as "Hold", BN as "Buy", GS as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 17.0% upside for BN (target: $54) vs -82.5% for ACIC (target: $2). GS is the only dividend payer here at 1.46% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Hold | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $10.00 | $1.90 | $54.40 | $995.89 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 11 | 5 | 9 | 55 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | +1.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 1 | 1 | 12 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | $13.48 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +20.9% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +3.5% |
ACIC leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). GS leads in 2 (Total Returns, Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
FTW vs PSFE vs ACIC vs BN vs GS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is FTW or PSFE or ACIC or BN or GS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
(GS) is the stronger pick with 17. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -9. 7% for Brookfield Corporation (BN). American Coastal Insurance Corporation (ACIC) offers the better valuation at 5. 0x trailing P/E (7. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Paysafe Limited (PSFE) a "Buy" — based on 11 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 — FTW or PSFE or ACIC or BN or GS?
On trailing P/E, American Coastal Insurance Corporation (ACIC) is the cheapest at 5.
0x versus Brookfield Corporation at 9999. 0x. On forward P/E, Paysafe Limited is actually cheaper at 4. 3x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — FTW or PSFE or ACIC or BN or GS?
Over the past 5 years, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
(GS) delivered a total return of +164. 4%, compared to -94. 2% for Paysafe Limited (PSFE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GS returned +534. 3% versus PSFE's -92. 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 — FTW or PSFE or ACIC or BN or GS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), EQV Ventures Acquisition Corp.
(FTW) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 34β versus Paysafe Limited's 2. 35β — meaning PSFE is approximately 587% more volatile than FTW relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, American Coastal Insurance Corporation (ACIC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 48% versus 5% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — FTW or PSFE or ACIC or BN or GS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
(GS) is pulling ahead at 17. 0% versus -9. 7% for Brookfield Corporation (BN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. grew EPS 77. 3% year-over-year, compared to -972. 2% for Paysafe Limited. Over a 3-year CAGR, ACIC leads at 15. 0% 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 — FTW or PSFE or ACIC or BN or GS?
American Coastal Insurance Corporation (ACIC) is the more profitable company, earning 31.
8% net margin versus -10. 7% for Paysafe Limited — meaning it keeps 31. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ACIC leads at 42. 6% versus 0. 0% for FTW. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ACIC leads at 86. 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.
07Is FTW or PSFE or ACIC or BN or GS more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Paysafe Limited (PSFE) trades at 4.
3x forward P/E versus 16. 7x for Brookfield Corporation — 12. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for BN: 17. 0% to $54. 40.
08Which pays a better dividend — FTW or PSFE or ACIC or BN or GS?
In this comparison, GS (1.
5% yield) pays a dividend. FTW, PSFE, ACIC, BN do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is FTW or PSFE or ACIC or BN or GS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, EQV Ventures Acquisition Corp.
(FTW) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 34)). Paysafe Limited (PSFE) carries a higher beta of 2. 35 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
10What are the main differences between FTW and PSFE and ACIC and BN and GS?
These companies operate in different sectors (FTW (Financial Services) and PSFE (Technology) and ACIC (Financial Services) and BN (Financial Services) and GS (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: FTW is a small-cap quality compounder stock; PSFE is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ACIC is a small-cap deep-value stock; BN is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; GS is a large-cap high-growth stock. GS pays a dividend while FTW, PSFE, ACIC, BN 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.
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.