FUTU vs TIGR

For growth investors, UP Fintech Holding Ltd.

Sponsored ADR Class A (TIGR) is the stronger pick with 43. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 35. 8% for Futu Holdings Limited (FUTU). UP Fintech Holding Ltd. Sponsored ADR Class A (TIGR) offers the better valuation at 18. 5x trailing P/E (7. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Futu Holdings Limited (FUTU) a "Buy" — based on 12 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, UP Fintech Holding Ltd.

Sponsored ADR Class A (TIGR) is the cheapest at 18. 5x versus Futu Holdings Limited at 31. 7x. On forward P/E, Futu Holdings Limited is actually cheaper at 1. 7x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Futu Holdings Limited (FUTU) delivered a total return of +12.

6%, compared to -64. 2% for UP Fintech Holding Ltd. Sponsored ADR Class A (TIGR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: FUTU returned +956. 7% versus TIGR's -37. 8%. 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), UP Fintech Holding Ltd.

Sponsored ADR Class A (TIGR) is the lower-risk stock at 2. 02β versus Futu Holdings Limited's 2. 04β — meaning FUTU is approximately 1% more volatile than TIGR relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, UP Fintech Holding Ltd. Sponsored ADR Class A (TIGR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 27% versus 31% for Futu Holdings Limited — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), UP Fintech Holding Ltd.

Sponsored ADR Class A (TIGR) is pulling ahead at 43. 7% versus 35. 8% for Futu Holdings Limited (FUTU). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: UP Fintech Holding Ltd. Sponsored ADR Class A grew EPS 71. 4% year-over-year, compared to 27. 2% for Futu Holdings Limited. 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.

Futu Holdings Limited (FUTU) is the more profitable company, earning 40.

1% net margin versus 15. 5% for UP Fintech Holding Ltd. Sponsored ADR Class A — meaning it keeps 40. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: FUTU leads at 48. 7% versus 35. 6% for TIGR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FUTU leads at 82. 0%, 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.

On forward earnings alone, Futu Holdings Limited (FUTU) trades at 1.

7x forward P/E versus 7. 0x for UP Fintech Holding Ltd. Sponsored ADR Class A — 5. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FUTU: 42. 9% to $224. 80.

None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.

All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Futu Holdings Limited (FUTU) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (+956.

7% 10Y return). UP Fintech Holding Ltd. Sponsored ADR Class A (TIGR) carries a higher beta of 2. 02 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (FUTU: +956. 7%, TIGR: -37. 8%), 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.

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.

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.