Financial - Credit Services
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
LC vs SOFI vs UPST vs AFRM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Credit Services
Financial - Credit Services
Software - Infrastructure
LC vs SOFI vs UPST vs AFRM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Financial - Credit Services | Financial - Credit Services | Financial - Credit Services | Software - Infrastructure |
| Market Cap | $1.96B | $20.79B | $2.74B | $21.85B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.33B | $4.77B | $1.08B | $3.72B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $136M | $481M | $49M | $282M |
| Gross Margin | 64.7% | 75.1% | 95.2% | 67.7% |
| Operating Margin | 25.0% | 11.0% | 5.1% | 6.2% |
| Forward P/E | 9.8x | 27.0x | 14.5x | 60.8x |
| Total Debt | $16M | $1.82B | $1.85B | $7.85B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $918M | $4.93B | $657M | $1.35B |
LC vs SOFI vs UPST vs AFRM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jan 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| LendingClub Corpora… (LC) | 100 | 157.2 | +57.2% |
| SoFi Technologies, … (SOFI) | 100 | 64.8 | -35.2% |
| Upstart Holdings, I… (UPST) | 100 | 46.1 | -53.9% |
| Affirm Holdings, In… (AFRM) | 100 | 65.8 | -34.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LC vs SOFI vs UPST vs AFRM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LC carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 2.36
- Lower volatility, beta 2.36, Low D/E 1.1%, current ratio 466.38x
- Beta 2.36, current ratio 466.38x
- NIM 5.4% vs SOFI's 4.4%
SOFI is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 55.5% 10Y total return vs AFRM's -32.6%
UPST is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 58.9%, EPS growth 131.3%
- 58.9% NII/revenue growth vs LC's 15.0%
AFRM is the clearest fit if your priority is efficiency.
- 2.5% ROA vs SOFI's 1.1%, ROIC -0.7% vs 3.6%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 58.9% NII/revenue growth vs LC's 15.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (9.8x vs 60.8x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 10.2% margin vs UPST's 5.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 2.36 vs UPST's 2.96, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 4 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +70.6% vs UPST's -44.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 2.5% ROA vs SOFI's 1.1%, ROIC -0.7% vs 3.6% |
LC vs SOFI vs UPST vs AFRM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
LC vs SOFI vs UPST vs AFRM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
LC leads in 6 of 6 categories
SOFI leads 0 • UPST leads 0 • AFRM leads 0
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LC leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SOFI is the larger business by revenue, generating $4.8B annually — 4.4x UPST's $1.1B. LC is the more profitable business, keeping 10.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to UPST's 5.0%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.3B | $4.8B | $1.1B | $3.7B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $287M | $760M | $68M | $495M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $136M | $481M | $49M | $282M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$2.9B | -$2.6B | -$146M | $619M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +64.7% | +75.1% | +95.2% | +67.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +25.0% | +11.0% | +5.1% | +6.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +10.2% | +10.1% | +5.0% | +7.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -2.1% | -83.5% | -15.4% | +16.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | +29.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +3.2% | -56.7% | -169.2% | +60.9% |
Valuation Metrics
LC leads this category, winning 5 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 14.8x trailing earnings, LC trades at a 97% valuation discount to AFRM's 437.2x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, LC's 2.7x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than AFRM's 205.7x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.0B | $20.8B | $2.7B | $21.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.1B | $17.7B | $3.9B | $28.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 14.83x | 41.79x | 63.73x | 437.20x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 9.77x | 26.95x | 14.53x | 60.83x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 4.44x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 2.68x | 23.25x | 49.74x | 205.69x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.47x | 4.36x | 2.55x | 6.78x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.35x | 1.95x | 3.86x | 7.29x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | 36.30x |
Profitability & Efficiency
LC leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LC delivers a 9.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $9 in annual profit, vs $6 for SOFI. LC carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to AFRM's 2.56x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), LC scores 6/9 vs SOFI's 3/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +9.5% | +5.9% | +6.6% | +8.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.2% | +1.1% | +1.7% | +2.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +17.3% | +3.6% | +1.7% | -0.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +3.3% | +1.2% | +2.4% | -0.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.01x | 0.17x | 2.32x | 2.56x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$902M | -$3.1B | $1.2B | $6.5B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $918M | $4.9B | $657M | $1.4B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $16M | $1.8B | $1.9B | $7.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.67x | 0.45x | 1.66x | 1.67x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LC leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in LC five years ago would be worth $12,082 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,116 for UPST. Over the past 12 months, LC leads with a +70.6% total return vs UPST's -44.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors AFRM at 76.4% vs UPST's 28.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -10.8% | -40.6% | -37.4% | -11.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +70.6% | +28.0% | -44.2% | +28.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +148.3% | +198.0% | +114.3% | +449.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +20.8% | +8.7% | -68.8% | +20.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -51.9% | +55.5% | -2.7% | -32.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +35.4% | +43.9% | +28.9% | +76.4% |
Risk & Volatility
LC leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
LC is the less volatile stock with a 2.36 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than UPST's 2.96 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. LC currently trades 78.7% from its 52-week high vs UPST's 32.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.36x | 2.54x | 2.96x | 2.72x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $21.67 | $32.73 | $87.30 | $100.00 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $9.70 | $12.44 | $23.96 | $42.09 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +78.7% | +49.8% | +32.9% | +65.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 57.5 | 39.5 | 50.5 | 66.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 2.1M | 66.0M | 4.7M | 5.3M |
Analyst Outlook
LC leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: LC as "Buy", SOFI as "Hold", UPST as "Buy", AFRM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 57.5% upside for UPST (target: $45) vs 23.2% for AFRM (target: $81).
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $22.75 | $20.89 | $45.17 | $80.77 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 29 | 27 | 22 | 33 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 0 | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.3% | 0.0% | +1.1% |
LC leads in 6 of 6 categories — strongest in Income & Cash Flow and Valuation Metrics.
LC vs SOFI vs UPST vs AFRM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LC or SOFI or UPST or AFRM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Upstart Holdings, Inc.
(UPST) is the stronger pick with 58. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 15. 0% for LendingClub Corporation (LC). LendingClub Corporation (LC) offers the better valuation at 14. 8x trailing P/E (9. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate LendingClub Corporation (LC) a "Buy" — based on 29 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 — LC or SOFI or UPST or AFRM?
On trailing P/E, LendingClub Corporation (LC) is the cheapest at 14.
8x versus Affirm Holdings, Inc. at 437. 2x. On forward P/E, LendingClub Corporation is actually cheaper at 9. 8x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — LC or SOFI or UPST or AFRM?
Over the past 5 years, LendingClub Corporation (LC) delivered a total return of +20.
8%, compared to -68. 8% for Upstart Holdings, Inc. (UPST). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: SOFI returned +55. 5% versus LC's -51. 9%. 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 — LC or SOFI or UPST or AFRM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), LendingClub Corporation (LC) is the lower-risk stock at 2.
36β versus Upstart Holdings, Inc. 's 2. 96β — meaning UPST is approximately 25% more volatile than LC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, LendingClub Corporation (LC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 3% for Affirm Holdings, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — LC or SOFI or UPST or AFRM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Upstart Holdings, Inc.
(UPST) is pulling ahead at 58. 9% versus 15. 0% for LendingClub Corporation (LC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: LendingClub Corporation grew EPS 155. 6% year-over-year, compared to 0. 0% for SoFi Technologies, 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.
06Which has better profit margins — LC or SOFI or UPST or AFRM?
LendingClub Corporation (LC) is the more profitable company, earning 10.
2% net margin versus 1. 6% for Affirm Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 10. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LC leads at 25. 0% versus -2. 7% for AFRM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — UPST leads at 95. 2%, 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 LC or SOFI or UPST or AFRM more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, LendingClub Corporation (LC) trades at 9.
8x forward P/E versus 60. 8x for Affirm Holdings, Inc. — 51. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for UPST: 57. 5% to $45. 17.
08Which pays a better dividend — LC or SOFI or UPST or AFRM?
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.
09Is LC or SOFI or UPST or AFRM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, SoFi Technologies, Inc.
(SOFI) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding. LendingClub Corporation (LC) carries a higher beta of 2. 36 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (SOFI: +55. 5%, LC: -51. 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.
10What are the main differences between LC and SOFI and UPST and AFRM?
These companies operate in different sectors (LC (Financial Services) and SOFI (Financial Services) and UPST (Financial Services) and AFRM (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: LC is a small-cap deep-value stock; SOFI is a mid-cap high-growth stock; UPST is a small-cap high-growth stock; AFRM is a mid-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.
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.