Conglomerates
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
GFF vs NCI vs ALLE vs BTBT vs MAS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Apparel - Manufacturers
Security & Protection Services
Financial - Capital Markets
Construction
GFF vs NCI vs ALLE vs BTBT vs MAS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Conglomerates | Apparel - Manufacturers | Security & Protection Services | Financial - Capital Markets | Construction |
| Market Cap | $4.10B | $23M | $11.55B | $580M | $14.47B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $2.35B | $236M | $4.16B | $164M | $7.68B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $35M | $8M | $634M | $137M | $837M |
| Gross Margin | 42.6% | 21.0% | 45.0% | 61.9% | 35.4% |
| Operating Margin | 8.3% | 4.9% | 20.6% | 16.8% | 16.8% |
| Forward P/E | 16.8x | 21.9x | 15.3x | 9.0x | 16.8x |
| Total Debt | $1.59B | $70M | $2.28B | $14M | $3.44B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $99M | $9M | $356M | $95M | $647M |
GFF vs NCI vs ALLE vs BTBT vs MAS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Apr 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Griffon Corporation (GFF) | 100 | 134.3 | +34.3% |
| Neo-Concept Interna… (NCI) | 100 | 17.6 | -82.4% |
| Allegion plc (ALLE) | 100 | 110.5 | +10.5% |
| Bit Digital, Inc. (BTBT) | 100 | 88.2 | -11.8% |
| Masco Corporation (MAS) | 100 | 104.8 | +4.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: GFF vs NCI vs ALLE vs BTBT vs MAS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
GFF ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding.
- 5.4% 10Y total return vs MAS's 151.5%
- +25.2% vs NCI's -35.3%
Among these 5 stocks, NCI doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
ALLE is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Dividend streak 12 yrs, beta 0.66, yield 1.5%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.66, current ratio 1.84x
- PEG 0.90 vs MAS's 3.38
- Beta 0.66, yield 1.5%, current ratio 1.84x
BTBT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 264.6%, EPS growth 225.0%
- 264.6% NII/revenue growth vs GFF's -3.9%
- 17.3% margin vs GFF's 1.5%
- 19.0% ROA vs GFF's 1.7%, ROIC 6.5% vs 9.1%
MAS is the clearest fit if your priority is dividends.
- 1.7% yield, 12-year raise streak, vs GFF's 1.0%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 264.6% NII/revenue growth vs GFF's -3.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (15.3x vs 16.8x), PEG 0.90 vs 3.38 | |
| Quality / Margins | 17.3% margin vs GFF's 1.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.66 vs BTBT's 3.41 | |
| Dividends | 1.7% yield, 12-year raise streak, vs GFF's 1.0%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +25.2% vs NCI's -35.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 19.0% ROA vs GFF's 1.7%, ROIC 6.5% vs 9.1% |
GFF vs NCI vs ALLE vs BTBT vs MAS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
GFF vs NCI vs ALLE vs BTBT vs MAS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
BTBT leads in 1 of 6 categories
GFF leads 1 • MAS leads 1 • NCI leads 0 • ALLE leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — ALLE and BTBT each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MAS is the larger business by revenue, generating $7.7B annually — 46.9x BTBT's $164M. BTBT is the more profitable business, keeping 17.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to GFF's 1.5%. On growth, ALLE holds the edge at +9.7% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $2.3B | $236M | $4.2B | $164M | $7.7B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $243M | — | $959M | $166M | $1.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $35M | — | $634M | $137M | $837M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $287M | — | $704M | -$448M | $943M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +42.6% | +21.0% | +45.0% | +61.9% | +35.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +8.3% | +4.9% | +20.6% | +16.8% | +16.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +1.5% | +3.4% | +15.2% | +17.3% | +10.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +12.2% | -8.0% | +16.9% | -65.3% | +12.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -31.0% | — | +9.7% | — | +6.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -65.3% | — | -7.0% | +2.8% | +20.7% |
Valuation Metrics
BTBT leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 9.0x trailing earnings, BTBT trades at a 89% valuation discount to GFF's 80.8x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), ALLE offers better value at 1.06x vs GFF's 4.53x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $4.1B | $23M | $11.5B | $580M | $14.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $5.6B | $30M | $13.5B | $498M | $17.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 80.75x | 21.92x | 18.06x | 9.00x | 18.59x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 16.79x | — | 15.33x | — | 16.79x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 4.53x | — | 1.06x | — | 3.75x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 20.77x | 13.55x | 13.62x | 8.32x | 12.16x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.63x | 0.76x | 2.84x | 3.54x | 1.91x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 55.55x | 3.13x | 5.62x | 0.55x | 200.89x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 13.51x | — | 16.84x | — | 16.71x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — BTBT and MAS each lead in 4 of 8 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MAS delivers a 8.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $8 in annual profit, vs $21 for BTBT. BTBT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.03x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MAS's 45.81x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +40.8% | +29.6% | +32.1% | +21.4% | +8.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.7% | +7.1% | +12.3% | +19.0% | +15.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +9.1% | +10.6% | +18.1% | +6.5% | +35.4% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +11.0% | +19.8% | +20.8% | +8.5% | +35.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 21.52x | 1.22x | 1.10x | 0.03x | 45.81x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.5B | $60M | $1.9B | -$81M | $2.8B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $99M | $9M | $356M | $95M | $647M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.6B | $70M | $2.3B | $14M | $3.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 4.02x | 3.08x | 8.61x | — | 12.60x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
GFF leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in GFF five years ago would be worth $36,095 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $236 for NCI. Over the past 12 months, GFF leads with a +25.2% total return vs NCI's -35.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors GFF at 45.3% vs NCI's -71.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +17.6% | -1.8% | -16.2% | -11.8% | +11.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +25.2% | -35.3% | -3.2% | -13.5% | +18.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +207.0% | -97.6% | +30.3% | -21.1% | +39.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +261.0% | -97.6% | +0.6% | -82.8% | +15.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +540.7% | -97.1% | +123.6% | -61.0% | +151.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +45.3% | -71.3% | +9.2% | -7.6% | +11.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — NCI and MAS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
NCI is the less volatile stock with a -1.10 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than BTBT's 3.41 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MAS currently trades 90.6% from its 52-week high vs NCI's 8.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.35x | -1.10x | 0.66x | 3.41x | 1.28x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $97.58 | $13.81 | $183.11 | $4.55 | $79.19 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $65.01 | $0.32 | $131.25 | $1.25 | $58.16 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +90.2% | +8.1% | +73.4% | +39.6% | +90.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 58.6 | 39.0 | 41.5 | 62.2 | 59.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 348K | 3.3M | 886K | 18.6M | 2.7M |
Analyst Outlook
MAS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: GFF as "Buy", ALLE as "Hold", BTBT as "Buy", MAS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 177.8% upside for BTBT (target: $5) vs 15.1% for MAS (target: $83). For income investors, MAS offers the higher dividend yield at 1.73% vs BTBT's 0.31%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | — | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $115.00 | — | $172.50 | $5.00 | $82.60 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 7 | — | 23 | 2 | 38 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.0% | — | +1.5% | +0.3% | +1.7% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 1 | 12 | 0 | 12 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.85 | — | $2.03 | $0.01 | $1.24 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +4.5% | 0.0% | +0.7% | 0.0% | +3.9% |
BTBT leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). GFF leads in 1 (Total Returns). 3 tied.
GFF vs NCI vs ALLE vs BTBT vs MAS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is GFF or NCI or ALLE or BTBT or MAS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Bit Digital, Inc.
(BTBT) is the stronger pick with 264. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 9% for Griffon Corporation (GFF). Bit Digital, Inc. (BTBT) offers the better valuation at 9. 0x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Griffon Corporation (GFF) a "Buy" — based on 7 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 — GFF or NCI or ALLE or BTBT or MAS?
On trailing P/E, Bit Digital, Inc.
(BTBT) is the cheapest at 9. 0x versus Griffon Corporation at 80. 8x. On forward P/E, Allegion plc is actually cheaper at 15. 3x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Allegion plc wins at 0. 90x versus Masco Corporation's 3. 38x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — GFF or NCI or ALLE or BTBT or MAS?
Over the past 5 years, Griffon Corporation (GFF) delivered a total return of +261.
0%, compared to -97. 6% for Neo-Concept International Group Holdings Limited (NCI). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GFF returned +540. 7% versus NCI's -97. 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 — GFF or NCI or ALLE or BTBT or MAS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Neo-Concept International Group Holdings Limited (NCI) is the lower-risk stock at -1.
10β versus Bit Digital, Inc. 's 3. 41β — meaning BTBT is approximately -411% more volatile than NCI relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Bit Digital, Inc. (BTBT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 3% versus 46% for Masco Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — GFF or NCI or ALLE or BTBT or MAS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Bit Digital, Inc.
(BTBT) is pulling ahead at 264. 6% versus -3. 9% for Griffon Corporation (GFF). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Bit Digital, Inc. grew EPS 225. 0% year-over-year, compared to -74. 2% for Griffon Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, ALLE leads at 7. 5% 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 — GFF or NCI or ALLE or BTBT or MAS?
Bit Digital, Inc.
(BTBT) is the more profitable company, earning 17. 3% net margin versus 2. 0% for Griffon Corporation — meaning it keeps 17. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ALLE leads at 21. 1% versus 4. 9% for NCI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BTBT leads at 61. 9%, 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 GFF or NCI or ALLE or BTBT or MAS more undervalued right now?
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, Allegion plc (ALLE) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 90x versus Masco Corporation's 3. 38x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Allegion plc (ALLE) trades at 15. 3x forward P/E versus 16. 8x for Griffon Corporation — 1. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for BTBT: 177. 8% to $5. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — GFF or NCI or ALLE or BTBT or MAS?
In this comparison, MAS (1.
7% yield), ALLE (1. 5% yield), GFF (1. 0% yield), BTBT (0. 3% yield) pay a dividend. NCI does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is GFF or NCI or ALLE or BTBT or MAS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Neo-Concept International Group Holdings Limited (NCI) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -1.
10)). Bit Digital, Inc. (BTBT) carries a higher beta of 3. 41 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (NCI: -97. 1%, BTBT: -61. 0%), 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.
10What are the main differences between GFF and NCI and ALLE and BTBT and MAS?
These companies operate in different sectors (GFF (Industrials) and NCI (Consumer Cyclical) and ALLE (Industrials) and BTBT (Financial Services) and MAS (Industrials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: GFF is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NCI is a small-cap high-growth stock; ALLE is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; BTBT is a small-cap high-growth stock; MAS is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. GFF, ALLE, MAS pay a dividend while NCI, BTBT 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.