GBDC vs GS

For growth investors, Golub Capital BDC, Inc.

(GBDC) is the stronger pick with 42. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 17. 0% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS). Golub Capital BDC, Inc. (GBDC) offers the better valuation at 9. 4x trailing P/E (9. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Golub Capital BDC, Inc. (GBDC) 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.

On trailing P/E, Golub Capital BDC, Inc.

(GBDC) is the cheapest at 9. 4x versus The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. at 22. 7x. On forward P/E, Golub Capital BDC, Inc. is actually cheaper at 9. 3x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Golub Capital BDC, Inc. wins at 0. 30x versus The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. 's 1. 11x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.

(GS) delivered a total return of +172. 3%, compared to +34. 3% for Golub Capital BDC, Inc. (GBDC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GS returned +521. 9% versus GBDC's +60. 5%. 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), Golub Capital BDC, Inc.

(GBDC) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 64β versus The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. 's 1. 47β — meaning GS is approximately 129% more volatile than GBDC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Golub Capital BDC, Inc. (GBDC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 123% versus 5% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Golub Capital BDC, Inc.

(GBDC) is pulling ahead at 42. 5% versus 17. 0% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. grew EPS 77. 3% year-over-year, compared to 4. 4% for Golub Capital BDC, Inc.. 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.

Golub Capital BDC, Inc.

(GBDC) is the more profitable company, earning 43. 2% net margin versus 11. 3% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. — meaning it keeps 43. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: GBDC leads at 78. 9% versus 14. 5% for GS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — GBDC leads at 81. 5%, 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, Golub Capital BDC, Inc. (GBDC) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 30x versus The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. 's 1. 11x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Golub Capital BDC, Inc. (GBDC) trades at 9. 3x forward P/E versus 15. 5x for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. — 6. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for GS: 8. 4% to $995. 89.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Golub Capital BDC, Inc. (GBDC) offers the highest yield at 10. 3%, versus 1. 5% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Golub Capital BDC, Inc.

(GBDC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 64), 10. 3% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (GBDC: +60. 5%, GS: +521. 9%), 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.