GEG vs TPVG vs CSWC vs HRZN vs ARCC

For growth investors, TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp.

(TPVG) is the stronger pick with 36. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -8. 5% for Great Elm Group, Inc. (GEG). Horizon Technology Finance Corporation (HRZN) offers the better valuation at 4. 3x trailing P/E (6. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Capital Southwest Corporation (CSWC) a "Buy" — based on 10 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, Horizon Technology Finance Corporation (HRZN) is the cheapest at 4.

3x versus Capital Southwest Corporation at 16. 3x. On forward P/E, Horizon Technology Finance Corporation is actually cheaper at 6. 1x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Horizon Technology Finance Corporation wins at 0. 26x versus TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp. 's 6. 41x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Capital Southwest Corporation (CSWC) delivered a total return of +51.

4%, compared to -32. 8% for Horizon Technology Finance Corporation (HRZN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CSWC returned +234. 2% versus GEG's -65. 4%. 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), Great Elm Group, Inc.

(GEG) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 39β versus Capital Southwest Corporation's 0. 84β — meaning CSWC is approximately 114% more volatile than GEG relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Great Elm Group, Inc. (GEG) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 78% versus 149% for Horizon Technology Finance Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp.

(TPVG) is pulling ahead at 36. 6% versus -8. 5% for Great Elm Group, Inc. (GEG). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Great Elm Group, Inc. grew EPS 812. 7% year-over-year, compared to -28. 3% for Capital Southwest Corporation. 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.

Great Elm Group, Inc.

(GEG) is the more profitable company, earning 79. 0% net margin versus -6. 6% for Horizon Technology Finance Corporation — meaning it keeps 79. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: TPVG leads at 77. 9% versus -49. 0% for GEG. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — TPVG leads at 83. 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, Horizon Technology Finance Corporation (HRZN) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 26x versus TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp. 's 6. 41x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Horizon Technology Finance Corporation (HRZN) trades at 6. 1x forward P/E versus 10. 1x for Capital Southwest Corporation — 4. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for TPVG: 49. 4% to $8. 95.

In this comparison, HRZN (27.

8% yield), TPVG (17. 1% yield), CSWC (10. 2% yield), ARCC (2. 0% yield) pay a dividend. GEG does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Capital Southwest Corporation (CSWC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

84), 10. 2% yield, +234. 2% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CSWC: +234. 2%, GEG: -65. 4%), 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 (GEG (Healthcare) and TPVG (Financial Services) and CSWC (Financial Services) and HRZN (Financial Services) and ARCC (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

In terms of investment character: GEG is a small-cap deep-value stock; TPVG is a small-cap high-growth stock; CSWC is a small-cap deep-value stock; HRZN is a small-cap high-growth stock; ARCC is a mid-cap high-growth stock. TPVG, CSWC, HRZN, ARCC pay a dividend while GEG 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.