Financial - Capital Markets
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
LGHL vs PFSI vs ICE vs FUTU vs IBKR
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Mortgages
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
Financial - Capital Markets
Investment - Banking & Investment Services
LGHL vs PFSI vs ICE vs FUTU vs IBKR — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Financial - Capital Markets | Financial - Mortgages | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges | Financial - Capital Markets | Investment - Banking & Investment Services |
| Market Cap | $168K | $4.62B | $88.45B | $51.52B | $37.30B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $-31M | $4.36B | $12.64B | $13.59B | $10.23B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-41M | $507M | $3.30B | $7.91B | $984M |
| Gross Margin | 119.5% | 91.4% | 61.9% | 82.0% | 89.8% |
| Operating Margin | 169.8% | 34.6% | 38.7% | 48.7% | 86.0% |
| Forward P/E | — | 7.2x | 19.5x | 1.5x | 33.6x |
| Total Debt | $5M | $23.06B | $20.28B | $8.55B | $19M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $17M | $302M | $837M | $11.69B | $4.96B |
LGHL vs PFSI vs ICE vs FUTU vs IBKR — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lion Group Holding … (LGHL) | 100 | 0.0 | -100.0% |
| PennyMac Financial … (PFSI) | 100 | 264.0 | +164.0% |
| Intercontinental Ex… (ICE) | 100 | 160.6 | +60.6% |
| Futu Holdings Limit… (FUTU) | 100 | 906.1 | +806.1% |
| Interactive Brokers… (IBKR) | 100 | 790.5 | +690.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LGHL vs PFSI vs ICE vs FUTU vs IBKR
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, LGHL doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
PFSI is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 173.8%, EPS growth 59.2%
- 173.8% NII/revenue growth vs LGHL's -278.8%
- 1.3% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs ICE's 1.2%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
ICE ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 14 yrs, beta 0.33, yield 1.2%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.33, Low D/E 69.9%, current ratio 1.02x
- Beta 0.33, yield 1.2%, current ratio 1.02x
- Beta 0.33 vs LGHL's 2.04
FUTU is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.02 vs ICE's 2.19
- Lower P/E (1.5x vs 19.5x), PEG 0.02 vs 2.19
IBKR carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding.
- 8.2% 10Y total return vs FUTU's 8.8%
- Efficiency ratio 0.0% vs PFSI's 0.6% (lower = leaner)
- +86.9% vs LGHL's -99.6%
- Efficiency ratio 0.0% vs PFSI's 0.6%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 173.8% NII/revenue growth vs LGHL's -278.8% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (1.5x vs 19.5x), PEG 0.02 vs 2.19 | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.0% vs PFSI's 0.6% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.33 vs LGHL's 2.04 | |
| Dividends | 1.3% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs ICE's 1.2%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +86.9% vs LGHL's -99.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.0% vs PFSI's 0.6% |
LGHL vs PFSI vs ICE vs FUTU vs IBKR — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
LGHL vs PFSI vs ICE vs FUTU vs IBKR — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
LGHL leads in 1 of 6 categories
IBKR leads 1 • PFSI leads 0 • ICE leads 0 • FUTU leads 0 • 4 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LGHL leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FUTU and LGHL operate at a comparable scale, with $13.6B and -$31M in trailing revenue. LGHL is the more profitable business, keeping 87.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to IBKR's 9.6%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | -$31M | $4.4B | $12.6B | $13.6B | $10.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$56M | $1.0B | $6.5B | $10.0B | $8.9B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$41M | $507M | $3.3B | $7.9B | $984M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$19M | -$3.8B | $4.3B | $0 | $15.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +119.5% | +91.4% | +61.9% | +82.0% | +89.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +169.8% | +34.6% | +38.7% | +48.7% | +86.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +87.7% | +11.5% | +26.1% | +40.1% | +9.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +61.1% | -32.4% | +33.9% | +2.3% | +153.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -74.4% | +7.7% | +23.1% | +112.0% | +26.0% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — LGHL and FUTU and IBKR each lead in 2 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 9.5x trailing earnings, PFSI trades at a 75% valuation discount to IBKR's 37.7x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), FUTU offers better value at 0.30x vs ICE's 3.05x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $168,280 | $4.6B | $88.4B | $51.5B | $37.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | -$12M | $27.4B | $107.9B | $51.1B | $32.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.01x | 9.53x | 27.06x | 29.18x | 37.71x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 7.17x | 19.48x | 1.53x | 33.59x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 3.05x | 0.30x | 1.27x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 18.11x | 16.71x | 58.89x | 3.64x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 1.06x | 7.00x | 29.69x | 3.65x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.02x | 1.11x | 3.08x | 5.67x | 1.83x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 20.62x | 13.09x | 2.37x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — FUTU and IBKR each lead in 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
FUTU delivers a 26.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $26 in annual profit, vs $-3 for LGHL. IBKR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to PFSI's 5.35x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ICE scores 9/9 vs LGHL's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -2.6% | +12.0% | +11.6% | +26.4% | +5.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -79.2% | +1.8% | +2.3% | +4.6% | +0.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -187.3% | +4.4% | +7.5% | +14.8% | +24.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -2.7% | +10.4% | +9.5% | +25.1% | +22.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 4 | 9 | 4 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.64x | 5.35x | 0.70x | 0.31x | 0.00x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$12M | $22.8B | $19.4B | -$3.1B | -$4.9B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $17M | $302M | $837M | $11.7B | $5.0B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $5M | $23.1B | $20.3B | $8.6B | $19M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -55.08x | 1.35x | 6.53x | — | 2.13x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
IBKR leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in IBKR five years ago would be worth $48,609 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $0 for LGHL. Over the past 12 months, IBKR leads with a +86.9% total return vs LGHL's -99.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors IBKR at 62.9% vs LGHL's -96.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -94.6% | -32.4% | -2.1% | -17.4% | +24.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -99.6% | -8.0% | -10.4% | +45.1% | +86.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | +59.2% | +50.8% | +262.2% | +332.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | +63.7% | +43.4% | +15.0% | +386.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | +603.4% | +225.3% | +875.5% | +823.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -96.9% | +16.8% | +14.7% | +53.6% | +62.9% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ICE and IBKR each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ICE is the less volatile stock with a 0.33 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LGHL's 2.04 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. IBKR currently trades 95.8% from its 52-week high vs LGHL's 0.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.04x | 0.93x | 0.33x | 2.04x | 1.93x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $377.52 | $160.36 | $189.35 | $202.53 | $87.37 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.75 | $82.67 | $143.17 | $99.20 | $44.45 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +0.2% | +55.3% | +82.5% | +71.5% | +95.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 21.1 | 40.4 | 38.8 | 65.0 | 74.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 32K | 604K | 3.0M | 1.4M | 4.5M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — PFSI and ICE each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: PFSI as "Buy", ICE as "Buy", FUTU as "Buy", IBKR as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 61.3% upside for PFSI (target: $143) vs 4.7% for IBKR (target: $88). For income investors, PFSI offers the higher dividend yield at 1.31% vs IBKR's 0.36%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $143.00 | $195.71 | $224.80 | $87.67 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 20 | 36 | 12 | 19 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.3% | +1.2% | — | +0.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 2 | 14 | — | 3 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $1.16 | $1.93 | — | $0.30 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.1% | +1.6% | 0.0% | +0.2% |
LGHL leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). IBKR leads in 1 (Total Returns). 4 tied.
LGHL vs PFSI vs ICE vs FUTU vs IBKR: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LGHL or PFSI or ICE or FUTU or IBKR a better buy right now?
For growth investors, PennyMac Financial Services, Inc.
(PFSI) is the stronger pick with 173. 8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -278. 8% for Lion Group Holding Ltd. (LGHL). PennyMac Financial Services, Inc. (PFSI) offers the better valuation at 9. 5x trailing P/E (7. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate PennyMac Financial Services, Inc. (PFSI) a "Buy" — based on 20 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 — LGHL or PFSI or ICE or FUTU or IBKR?
On trailing P/E, PennyMac Financial Services, Inc.
(PFSI) is the cheapest at 9. 5x versus Interactive Brokers Group, Inc. at 37. 7x. On forward P/E, Futu Holdings Limited is actually cheaper at 1. 5x — 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: Futu Holdings Limited wins at 0. 02x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. 's 2. 19x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — LGHL or PFSI or ICE or FUTU or IBKR?
Over the past 5 years, Interactive Brokers Group, Inc.
(IBKR) delivered a total return of +386. 1%, compared to -100. 0% for Lion Group Holding Ltd. (LGHL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: FUTU returned +875. 5% versus LGHL's -100. 0%. 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 — LGHL or PFSI or ICE or FUTU or IBKR?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.
(ICE) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 33β versus Lion Group Holding Ltd. 's 2. 04β — meaning LGHL is approximately 524% more volatile than ICE relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Interactive Brokers Group, Inc. (IBKR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 5% for PennyMac Financial Services, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — LGHL or PFSI or ICE or FUTU or IBKR?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), PennyMac Financial Services, Inc.
(PFSI) is pulling ahead at 173. 8% versus -278. 8% for Lion Group Holding Ltd. (LGHL). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: PennyMac Financial Services, Inc. grew EPS 59. 2% year-over-year, compared to -21. 2% for Lion Group Holding Ltd.. 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 — LGHL or PFSI or ICE or FUTU or IBKR?
Lion Group Holding Ltd.
(LGHL) is the more profitable company, earning 87. 7% net margin versus 9. 6% for Interactive Brokers Group, Inc. — meaning it keeps 87. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LGHL leads at 169. 8% versus 34. 6% for PFSI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — LGHL leads at 119. 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.
07Is LGHL or PFSI or ICE or FUTU or IBKR 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, Futu Holdings Limited (FUTU) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 02x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. 's 2. 19x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Futu Holdings Limited (FUTU) trades at 1. 5x forward P/E versus 33. 6x for Interactive Brokers Group, Inc. — 32. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PFSI: 61. 3% to $143. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — LGHL or PFSI or ICE or FUTU or IBKR?
In this comparison, PFSI (1.
3% yield), ICE (1. 2% yield), IBKR (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. LGHL, FUTU do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is LGHL or PFSI or ICE or FUTU or IBKR 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. 33), 1. 2% yield, +225. 3% 10Y return). Lion Group Holding Ltd. (LGHL) carries a higher beta of 2. 04 — 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: +225. 3%, LGHL: -100. 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 LGHL and PFSI and ICE and FUTU and IBKR?
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: LGHL is a small-cap quality compounder stock; PFSI is a small-cap high-growth stock; ICE is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; FUTU is a mid-cap high-growth stock; IBKR is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. PFSI, ICE pay a dividend while LGHL, FUTU, IBKR 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.