HCM vs CAN vs MARA vs ZLAB

For growth investors, Canaan Inc.

(CAN) is the stronger pick with 96. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -24. 8% for HUTCHMED (China) Limited (HCM). HUTCHMED (China) Limited (HCM) offers the better valuation at 60. 5x trailing P/E (41. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate HUTCHMED (China) Limited (HCM) 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.

Over the past 5 years, HUTCHMED (China) Limited (HCM) delivered a total return of -49.

3%, compared to -92. 3% for Canaan Inc. (CAN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: HCM returned +1. 0% versus CAN's -90. 1%. 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), HUTCHMED (China) Limited (HCM) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

66β versus Canaan Inc. 's 4. 41β — meaning CAN is approximately 566% more volatile than HCM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, HUTCHMED (China) Limited (HCM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 12% versus 105% for Marathon Digital Holdings, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Canaan Inc.

(CAN) is pulling ahead at 96. 7% versus -24. 8% for HUTCHMED (China) Limited (HCM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Canaan Inc. grew EPS 51. 1% year-over-year, compared to -314. 5% for Marathon Digital Holdings, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ZLAB leads at 28. 9% 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.

HUTCHMED (China) Limited (HCM) is the more profitable company, earning 6.

0% net margin versus -144. 6% for Marathon Digital Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 6. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: HCM leads at -6. 9% versus -90. 6% for MARA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ZLAB leads at 58. 6%, 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.

Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CAN: 336.

9% to $2. 25.

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, HUTCHMED (China) Limited (HCM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

66)). Canaan Inc. (CAN) carries a higher beta of 4. 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 (HCM: +1. 0%, CAN: -90. 1%), 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 (HCM (Healthcare) and CAN (Technology) and MARA (Financial Services) and ZLAB (Healthcare)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

In terms of investment character: HCM is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CAN is a small-cap high-growth stock; MARA is a small-cap high-growth stock; ZLAB is a small-cap high-growth stock. 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.