Packaged Foods
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
LSF vs FLNT vs AMZN vs ACMR vs GOOGL
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Advertising Agencies
Specialty Retail
Semiconductors
Internet Content & Information
LSF vs FLNT vs AMZN vs ACMR vs GOOGL — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Packaged Foods | Advertising Agencies | Specialty Retail | Semiconductors | Internet Content & Information |
| Market Cap | $32M | $82M | $2.93T | $3.96B | $4.85T |
| Revenue (TTM) | $38M | $209M | $742.78B | $960M | $422.57B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-2M | $-27M | $90.80B | $91M | $160.21B |
| Gross Margin | 49.2% | 24.5% | 50.6% | 44.2% | 60.4% |
| Operating Margin | -9.9% | -9.7% | 11.5% | 12.5% | 32.7% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 31.4x | 30.8x | 28.9x |
| Total Debt | $246K | $38M | $152.99B | $303M | $59.29B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $8M | $13M | $86.81B | $766M | $30.71B |
LSF vs FLNT vs AMZN vs ACMR vs GOOGL — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Sep 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Laird Superfood, In… (LSF) | 100 | 6.5 | -93.5% |
| Fluent, Inc. (FLNT) | 100 | 18.7 | -81.3% |
| Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) | 100 | 173.2 | +73.2% |
| ACM Research, Inc. (ACMR) | 100 | 259.9 | +159.9% |
| Alphabet Inc. (GOOGL) | 100 | 546.8 | +446.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LSF vs FLNT vs AMZN vs ACMR vs GOOGL
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LSF ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 26.5%, EPS growth 83.5%, 3Y rev CAGR 5.6%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.26, Low D/E 1.9%, current ratio 3.03x
- 26.5% revenue growth vs FLNT's -18.0%
FLNT is the clearest fit if your priority is stability.
- Beta 1.11 vs ACMR's 3.17
Among these 5 stocks, AMZN doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
ACMR carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 31.0% 10Y total return vs GOOGL's 10.0%
- PEG 0.87 vs AMZN's 1.12
- Lower P/E (30.8x vs 31.4x), PEG 0.87 vs 1.12
- 0.2% yield, 3-year raise streak, vs GOOGL's 0.2%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
GOOGL is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and defensive is your priority.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 1.28, yield 0.2%
- Beta 1.28, yield 0.2%, current ratio 2.01x
- 37.9% margin vs FLNT's -13.0%
- 27.4% ROA vs FLNT's -34.3%, ROIC 25.1% vs -31.8%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 26.5% revenue growth vs FLNT's -18.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (30.8x vs 31.4x), PEG 0.87 vs 1.12 | |
| Quality / Margins | 37.9% margin vs FLNT's -13.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.11 vs ACMR's 3.17 | |
| Dividends | 0.2% yield, 3-year raise streak, vs GOOGL's 0.2%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +166.8% vs LSF's -57.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 27.4% ROA vs FLNT's -34.3%, ROIC 25.1% vs -31.8% |
LSF vs FLNT vs AMZN vs ACMR vs GOOGL — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
LSF vs FLNT vs AMZN vs ACMR vs GOOGL — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
GOOGL leads in 2 of 6 categories
ACMR leads 1 • LSF leads 0 • FLNT leads 0 • AMZN leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
GOOGL leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AMZN is the larger business by revenue, generating $742.8B annually — 19419.3x LSF's $38M. GOOGL is the more profitable business, keeping 37.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FLNT's -13.0%. On growth, ACMR holds the edge at +34.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $38M | $209M | $742.8B | $960M | $422.6B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$4M | -$11M | $155.9B | $133M | $161.3B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$2M | -$27M | $90.8B | $91M | $160.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$3M | -$5M | -$2.5B | -$108M | $73.3B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +49.2% | +24.5% | +50.6% | +44.2% | +60.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -9.9% | -9.7% | +11.5% | +12.5% | +32.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -4.9% | -13.0% | +12.2% | +9.5% | +37.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -6.6% | -2.4% | -0.3% | -11.3% | +17.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -74.5% | -5.5% | +16.6% | +34.2% | +21.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -4.6% | +31.6% | +74.8% | -20.0% | +81.9% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — LSF and ACMR each lead in 2 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 37.1x trailing earnings, GOOGL trades at a 15% valuation discount to ACMR's 43.7x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), ACMR offers better value at 1.23x vs AMZN's 1.36x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $32M | $82M | $2.93T | $4.0B | $4.85T |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $24M | $107M | $3.00T | $3.5B | $4.88T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -16.56x | -2.65x | 38.03x | 43.69x | 37.07x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 31.41x | 30.81x | 28.90x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 1.36x | 1.23x | 1.24x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 20.58x | 27.83x | 32.44x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.73x | 0.39x | 4.09x | 4.40x | 12.03x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.25x | 3.96x | 7.18x | 2.09x | 11.80x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 37.83x | — | 381.09x | — | 66.17x |
Profitability & Efficiency
GOOGL leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
GOOGL delivers a 39.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $39 in annual profit, vs $-134 for FLNT. LSF carries lower financial leverage with a 0.02x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to FLNT's 2.07x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), GOOGL scores 7/9 vs ACMR's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -14.8% | -134.2% | +23.3% | +5.1% | +39.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -10.0% | -34.3% | +11.5% | +3.4% | +27.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -28.8% | -31.8% | +14.7% | +7.0% | +25.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -16.1% | -76.6% | +15.3% | +6.6% | +30.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 3 | 6 | 2 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.02x | 2.07x | 0.37x | 0.16x | 0.14x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$8M | $25M | $66.2B | -$463M | $28.6B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $8M | $13M | $86.8B | $766M | $30.7B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $246,430 | $38M | $153.0B | $303M | $59.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | -3.74x | 39.96x | 20.41x | 392.15x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
ACMR leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in GOOGL five years ago would be worth $35,112 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $853 for LSF. Over the past 12 months, ACMR leads with a +166.8% total return vs LSF's -57.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ACMR at 81.1% vs FLNT's -14.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +33.6% | +9.9% | +20.4% | +33.4% | +27.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -57.7% | +14.9% | +42.0% | +166.8% | +160.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +234.8% | -37.5% | +157.7% | +494.3% | +273.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -91.5% | -84.5% | +70.9% | +167.3% | +251.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -92.7% | -90.7% | +702.2% | +3100.5% | +1003.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +49.6% | -14.5% | +37.1% | +81.1% | +55.1% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — FLNT and GOOGL each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
FLNT is the less volatile stock with a 1.11 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ACMR's 3.17 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. GOOGL currently trades 99.7% from its 52-week high vs LSF's 37.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.26x | 1.11x | 1.50x | 3.17x | 1.28x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $7.94 | $4.15 | $278.56 | $71.65 | $402.00 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.96 | $1.50 | $188.82 | $19.76 | $152.20 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +37.5% | +67.0% | +97.9% | +83.5% | +99.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 58.5 | 34.9 | 74.2 | 66.3 | 83.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 47K | 33K | 45.2M | 1.1M | 28.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — ACMR and GOOGL each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: FLNT as "Hold", AMZN as "Buy", ACMR as "Buy", GOOGL as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 25.9% upside for FLNT (target: $4) vs 1.4% for GOOGL (target: $406). For income investors, GOOGL offers the higher dividend yield at 0.21% vs ACMR's 0.19%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $3.50 | $306.77 | $75.00 | $406.28 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 2 | 94 | 10 | 82 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +0.2% | +0.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | 3 | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $0.11 | $0.82 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.2% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.2% | +0.9% |
GOOGL leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). ACMR leads in 1 (Total Returns). 3 tied.
LSF vs FLNT vs AMZN vs ACMR vs GOOGL: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LSF or FLNT or AMZN or ACMR or GOOGL a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Laird Superfood, Inc.
(LSF) is the stronger pick with 26. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -18. 0% for Fluent, Inc. (FLNT). Alphabet Inc. (GOOGL) offers the better valuation at 37. 1x trailing P/E (28. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Amazon. com, Inc. (AMZN) a "Buy" — based on 94 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 — LSF or FLNT or AMZN or ACMR or GOOGL?
On trailing P/E, Alphabet Inc.
(GOOGL) is the cheapest at 37. 1x versus ACM Research, Inc. at 43. 7x. On forward P/E, Alphabet Inc. is actually cheaper at 28. 9x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: ACM Research, Inc. wins at 0. 87x versus Amazon. com, Inc. 's 1. 12x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — LSF or FLNT or AMZN or ACMR or GOOGL?
Over the past 5 years, Alphabet Inc.
(GOOGL) delivered a total return of +251. 1%, compared to -91. 5% for Laird Superfood, Inc. (LSF). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ACMR returned +31. 0% versus LSF's -92. 7%. 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 — LSF or FLNT or AMZN or ACMR or GOOGL?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Fluent, Inc.
(FLNT) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 11β versus ACM Research, Inc. 's 3. 17β — meaning ACMR is approximately 187% more volatile than FLNT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Laird Superfood, Inc. (LSF) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 2% for Fluent, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — LSF or FLNT or AMZN or ACMR or GOOGL?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Laird Superfood, Inc.
(LSF) is pulling ahead at 26. 5% versus -18. 0% for Fluent, Inc. (FLNT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Laird Superfood, Inc. grew EPS 83. 5% year-over-year, compared to -10. 5% for ACM Research, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ACMR leads at 32. 3% 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 — LSF or FLNT or AMZN or ACMR or GOOGL?
Alphabet Inc.
(GOOGL) is the more profitable company, earning 32. 8% net margin versus -13. 0% for Fluent, Inc. — meaning it keeps 32. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: GOOGL leads at 32. 1% versus -9. 7% for FLNT. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — GOOGL leads at 59. 7%, 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 LSF or FLNT or AMZN or ACMR or GOOGL 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, ACM Research, Inc. (ACMR) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 87x versus Amazon. com, Inc. 's 1. 12x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Alphabet Inc. (GOOGL) trades at 28. 9x forward P/E versus 31. 4x for Amazon. com, Inc. — 2. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FLNT: 25. 9% to $3. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — LSF or FLNT or AMZN or ACMR or GOOGL?
In this comparison, GOOGL (0.
2% yield), ACMR (0. 2% yield) pay a dividend. LSF, FLNT, AMZN do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is LSF or FLNT or AMZN or ACMR or GOOGL better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Alphabet Inc.
(GOOGL) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 28), +1004% 10Y return). ACM Research, Inc. (ACMR) carries a higher beta of 3. 17 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (GOOGL: +1004%, ACMR: +31. 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 LSF and FLNT and AMZN and ACMR and GOOGL?
These companies operate in different sectors (LSF (Consumer Defensive) and FLNT (Communication Services) and AMZN (Consumer Cyclical) and ACMR (Technology) and GOOGL (Communication Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: LSF is a small-cap high-growth stock; FLNT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; AMZN is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; ACMR is a small-cap high-growth stock; GOOGL is a mega-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.