Build Your Comparison

Side-by-side financial analysis
HCMA logo
HCMA
GS logo
GS
JPM logo
JPM
MS logo
MS
ICE logo
ICE
Try popular comparisons:

Stock Comparison

HCMA vs GS vs JPM vs MS vs ICE

Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.

Live fundamentals10-year financials5-year price chart
HCMA
HCM Acquisition Corp

Shell Companies

Financial ServicesNASDAQ • US
Market Cap$260M
5Y Perf.+2.9%
GS
The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.

Financial - Capital Markets

Financial ServicesNYSE • US
Market Cap$337.53B
5Y Perf.+221.9%
JPM
JPMorgan Chase & Co.

Banks - Diversified

Financial ServicesNYSE • US
Market Cap$896.00B
5Y Perf.+135.3%
MS
Morgan Stanley

Financial - Capital Markets

Financial ServicesNYSE • US
Market Cap$340.97B
5Y Perf.+144.9%
ICE
Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.

Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges

Financial ServicesNYSE • US
Market Cap$79.60B
5Y Perf.+6.4%

HCMA vs GS vs JPM vs MS vs ICE — Key Financials

Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.

Company Snapshot
HCMA logoHCMA
GS logoGS
JPM logoJPM
MS logoMS
ICE logoICE
IndustryShell CompaniesFinancial - Capital MarketsBanks - DiversifiedFinancial - Capital MarketsFinancial - Data & Stock Exchanges
Market Cap$260M$337.53B$896.00B$340.97B$79.60B
Revenue (TTM)$0.00$125.10B$280.33B$114.98B$12.64B
Net Income (TTM)$5M$17.18B$57.05B$16.86B$3.30B
Gross Margin47.5%60.0%57.1%61.9%
Operating Margin17.5%25.9%19.1%38.7%
Forward P/E0.0x17.9x14.4x18.0x17.3x
Total Debt$0.00$609.53B$942.38B$475.56B$20.28B
Cash & Equiv.$792K$164.26B$343.34B$111.69B$837M

HCMA vs GS vs JPM vs MS vs ICELong-Term Stock Performance

Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.

HCMA
GS
JPM
MS
ICE
StockMar 22Jun 26Return
HCM Acquisition Corp (HCMA)100102.9+2.9%
The Goldman Sachs G… (GS)100321.9+221.9%
JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM)100235.3+135.3%
Morgan Stanley (MS)100244.9+144.9%
Intercontinental Ex… (ICE)100106.4+6.4%

Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.

Quick Verdict: HCMA vs GS vs JPM vs MS vs ICE

Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.

Bottom line: HCMA and MS are tied at the top with 2 categories each (5-stock set) — the right choice depends on your priorities. Morgan Stanley is the stronger pick specifically for growth and revenue expansion and dividend income and shareholder returns. ICE and GS also each lead in at least one category. As sector peers, any of these can serve as alternatives in the same allocation.
HCMA
HCM Acquisition Corp
The Banking Pick

HCMA has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in value and stability.

  • Lower P/E (0.0x vs 17.3x)
  • Beta 0.04 vs GS's 1.60
Best for: value and stability
GS
The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
The Banking Pick

GS is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.

  • +72.7% vs ICE's -20.4%
Best for: momentum
JPM
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
The Banking Pick

JPM is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and valuation efficiency.

  • Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.94, yield 1.9%
  • PEG 0.81 vs ICE's 1.95
  • NIM 2.2% vs MS's 0.7%
Best for: income & stability and valuation efficiency
MS
Morgan Stanley
The Banking Pick

MS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.

  • Rev growth 11.5%, EPS growth 28.3%
  • 8.5% 10Y total return vs GS's 6.7%
  • Beta 1.40, yield 1.9%, current ratio 1.17x
  • 11.5% NII/revenue growth vs GS's -1.4%
Best for: growth exposure and long-term compounding
ICE
Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.
The Banking Pick

ICE ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night.

  • Lower volatility, beta 0.35, Low D/E 69.9%, current ratio 1.02x
  • Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs MS's 0.4% (lower = leaner)
  • Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs MS's 0.4%
Best for: sleep-well-at-night
See the full category breakdown
CategoryWinnerWhy
GrowthMS logoMS11.5% NII/revenue growth vs GS's -1.4%
ValueHCMA logoHCMALower P/E (0.0x vs 17.3x)
Quality / MarginsICE logoICEEfficiency ratio 0.2% vs MS's 0.4% (lower = leaner)
Stability / SafetyHCMA logoHCMABeta 0.04 vs GS's 1.60
DividendsMS logoMS1.9% yield, 12-year raise streak, vs JPM's 1.9%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
Momentum (1Y)GS logoGS+72.7% vs ICE's -20.4%
Efficiency (ROA)ICE logoICEEfficiency ratio 0.2% vs MS's 0.4%

HCMA vs GS vs JPM vs MS vs ICE — Revenue Breakdown by Segment

How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units

Discover the Fintech Stocks Theme

These companies are key players in the Fintech Stocks ecosystem. See how they stack up against the rest of the sector.

Explore Theme
HCMAHCM Acquisition Corp

Segment breakdown not available.

GSThe Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
FY 2025
Global Markets
71.1%$41.5B
Investment Management
28.6%$16.7B
Platform Solutions
0.3%$151M
JPMJPMorgan Chase & Co.
FY 2025
Commercial And Investment Bank
43.0%$78.5B
Consumer & Community Banking
41.7%$76.0B
Asset and Wealth Management Segment
13.2%$24.1B
Segment Reporting, Reconciling Item, Corporate Nonsegment
3.9%$7.0B
Segment Reconciling Items
-1.7%$-3,134,000,000
MSMorgan Stanley
FY 2025
Institutional Securities Segment
46.4%$33.1B
Wealth Management Segment
44.5%$31.8B
Investment Management Segment
9.1%$6.5B
ICEIntercontinental Exchange, Inc.
FY 2025
Fixed Income And Data Services Segment
51.1%$1.4B
Exchanges Segment
38.8%$1.0B
Mortgage Technology Segment
10.1%$269M

HCMA vs GS vs JPM vs MS vs ICE — Financial Metrics

Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.

BEST OVERALLICELAGGINGMS

Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)

ICE leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.

JPM and HCMA operate at a comparable scale, with $280.3B and $0 in trailing revenue. ICE is the more profitable business, keeping 26.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to GS's 13.7%.

MetricHCMA logoHCMAHCM Acquisition C…GS logoGSThe Goldman Sachs…JPM logoJPMJPMorgan Chase & …MS logoMSMorgan StanleyICE logoICEIntercontinental …
RevenueTrailing 12 months$0$125.1B$280.3B$115.0B$12.6B
EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax-$6M$24.0B$81.4B$26.6B$6.5B
Net IncomeAfter-tax profit$5M$17.2B$57.0B$16.9B$3.3B
Free Cash FlowCash after capex-$1M-$47.2B$100.9B-$17.9B$4.3B
Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue+47.5%+60.0%+57.1%+61.9%
Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue+17.5%+25.9%+19.1%+38.7%
Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue+13.7%+20.4%+14.7%+26.1%
FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue-37.7%+36.0%-15.6%+33.9%
Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year
EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year-171.4%+45.8%+16.0%+48.9%+23.1%
ICE leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.

Valuation Metrics

Evenly matched — HCMA and JPM each lead in 2 of 7 comparable metrics.

At 0.0x trailing earnings, HCMA trades at a 100% valuation discount to ICE's 24.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), JPM offers better value at 0.90x vs ICE's 2.74x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.

MetricHCMA logoHCMAHCM Acquisition C…GS logoGSThe Goldman Sachs…JPM logoJPMJPMorgan Chase & …MS logoMSMorgan StanleyICE logoICEIntercontinental …
Market CapShares × price$260M$337.5B$896.0B$341.0B$79.6B
Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash$259M$782.8B$1.50T$704.8B$99.0B
Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS0.02x20.71x16.00x20.98x24.36x
Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est.17.93x14.40x18.00x17.34x
PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate1.32x0.90x2.19x2.74x
EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple32.57x18.36x26.49x15.34x
Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue2.70x3.20x2.97x6.30x
Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share0.98x2.70x2.47x3.03x2.77x
Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF8.88x7.40x18.56x
Evenly matched — HCMA and JPM each lead in 2 of 7 comparable metrics.

Profitability & Efficiency

ICE leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.

JPM delivers a 15.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $16 in annual profit, vs $3 for HCMA. ICE carries lower financial leverage with a 0.70x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to GS's 4.88x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ICE scores 9/9 vs HCMA's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.

MetricHCMA logoHCMAHCM Acquisition C…GS logoGSThe Goldman Sachs…JPM logoJPMJPMorgan Chase & …MS logoMSMorgan StanleyICE logoICEIntercontinental …
ROE (TTM)Return on equity+3.1%+13.6%+15.9%+15.3%+11.6%
ROA (TTM)Return on assets+3.0%+1.0%+1.3%+1.2%+2.3%
ROICReturn on invested capital-1.0%+2.2%+4.5%+3.1%+7.5%
ROCEReturn on capital employed-1.3%+4.0%+8.9%+3.3%+9.5%
Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–945579
Debt / EquityFinancial leverage4.88x2.60x4.22x0.70x
Net DebtTotal debt minus cash-$792,423$445.3B$599.0B$363.9B$19.4B
Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets$792,423$164.3B$343.3B$111.7B$837M
Total DebtShort + long-term debt$0$609.5B$942.4B$475.6B$20.3B
Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense0.33x0.74x0.45x6.53x
ICE leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.

Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)

GS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.

A $10,000 investment in GS five years ago would be worth $30,053 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $10,353 for HCMA. Over the past 12 months, GS leads with a +72.7% total return vs ICE's -20.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors GS at 48.1% vs HCMA's -1.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.

MetricHCMA logoHCMAHCM Acquisition C…GS logoGSThe Goldman Sachs…JPM logoJPMJPMorgan Chase & …MS logoMSMorgan StanleyICE logoICEIntercontinental …
YTD ReturnYear-to-date+1.9%+17.2%-0.5%+18.8%-11.8%
1-Year ReturnPast 12 months+1.9%+72.7%+21.8%+65.3%-20.4%
3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends-5.4%+224.8%+138.2%+157.5%+34.6%
5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+3.5%+200.5%+118.2%+154.7%+30.9%
10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+3.5%+666.8%+465.8%+854.4%+195.3%
CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return-1.8%+48.1%+33.6%+37.1%+10.4%
GS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.

Risk & Volatility

HCMA leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.

HCMA is the less volatile stock with a 0.04 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than GS's 1.60 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. HCMA currently trades 97.8% from its 52-week high vs ICE's 74.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.

MetricHCMA logoHCMAHCM Acquisition C…GS logoGSThe Goldman Sachs…JPM logoJPMJPMorgan Chase & …MS logoMSMorgan StanleyICE logoICEIntercontinental …
Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 5000.04x1.60x0.94x1.40x0.35x
52-Week HighHighest price in past year$10.49$1095.89$337.25$219.16$189.35
52-Week LowLowest price in past year$10.03$609.59$262.71$128.81$136.67
% of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak+97.8%+97.0%+95.1%+97.7%+74.2%
RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–10065.657.359.162.231.9
Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded42K1.9M7.0M4.5M3.2M
HCMA leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst Outlook

Evenly matched — JPM and MS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst consensus: GS as "Hold", JPM as "Buy", MS as "Buy", ICE as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 38.0% upside for ICE (target: $194) vs -8.5% for GS (target: $973). For income investors, MS offers the higher dividend yield at 1.93% vs ICE's 1.38%.

MetricHCMA logoHCMAHCM Acquisition C…GS logoGSThe Goldman Sachs…JPM logoJPMJPMorgan Chase & …MS logoMSMorgan StanleyICE logoICEIntercontinental …
Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sellHoldBuyBuyBuy
Price TargetConsensus 12-month target$972.70$339.75$201.25$194.00
# AnalystsCovering analysts55615236
Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price+1.6%+1.9%+1.9%+1.4%
Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises14151213
Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS$16.62$5.95$4.14$1.93
Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap0.0%+3.7%+3.9%+1.7%+1.7%
Evenly matched — JPM and MS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Key Takeaway

ICE leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). GS leads in 1 (Total Returns). 2 tied.

Best OverallIntercontinental Exchange, … (ICE)Leads 2 of 6 categories
Loading custom metrics...

HCMA vs GS vs JPM vs MS vs ICE: Key Questions Answered

10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily

01

Is HCMA or GS or JPM or MS or ICE a better buy right now?

For growth investors, Morgan Stanley (MS) is the stronger pick with 11.

5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -1. 4% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS). HCM Acquisition Corp (HCMA) offers the better valuation at 0. 0x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) a "Buy" — based on 61 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.

02

Which has the better valuation — HCMA or GS or JPM or MS or ICE?

On trailing P/E, HCM Acquisition Corp (HCMA) is the cheapest at 0.

0x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. at 24. 4x. On forward P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co. is actually cheaper at 14. 4x — 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: JPMorgan Chase & Co. wins at 0. 81x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. 's 1. 95x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

03

Which is the better long-term investment — HCMA or GS or JPM or MS or ICE?

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

(GS) delivered a total return of +200. 5%, compared to +3. 5% for HCM Acquisition Corp (HCMA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MS returned +854. 4% versus HCMA's +3. 5%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

04

Which is safer — HCMA or GS or JPM or MS or ICE?

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), HCM Acquisition Corp (HCMA) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

04β versus The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. 's 1. 60β — meaning GS is approximately 4101% more volatile than HCMA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 70% versus 5% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

05

Which is growing faster — HCMA or GS or JPM or MS or ICE?

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Morgan Stanley (MS) is pulling ahead at 11.

5% versus -1. 4% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Morgan Stanley grew EPS 28. 3% year-over-year, compared to 1. 5% for JPMorgan Chase & Co.. 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.

06

Which has better profit margins — HCMA or GS or JPM or MS or ICE?

Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.

(ICE) is the more profitable company, earning 26. 1% net margin versus 0. 0% for HCM Acquisition Corp — meaning it keeps 26. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ICE leads at 38. 7% versus 0. 0% for HCMA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ICE 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.

07

Is HCMA or GS or JPM or MS or ICE 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, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 81x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. 's 1. 95x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) trades at 14. 4x forward P/E versus 18. 0x for Morgan Stanley — 3. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ICE: 38. 0% to $194. 00.

08

Which pays a better dividend — HCMA or GS or JPM or MS or ICE?

In this comparison, MS (1.

9% yield), JPM (1. 9% yield), GS (1. 6% yield), ICE (1. 4% yield) pay a dividend. HCMA does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

09

Is HCMA or GS or JPM or MS or ICE better for a retirement portfolio?

For long-horizon retirement investors, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.

(ICE) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 35), 1. 4% yield, +195. 3% 10Y return). The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS) carries a higher beta of 1. 60 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ICE: +195. 3%, GS: +666. 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.

10

What are the main differences between HCMA and GS and JPM and MS and ICE?

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.

In terms of investment character: HCMA is a small-cap deep-value stock; GS is a large-cap quality compounder stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock; MS is a large-cap quality compounder stock; ICE is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. GS, JPM, MS, ICE pay a dividend while HCMA 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.

You Might Also Compare

Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.