Information Technology Services
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
LZMH vs CLPS vs CODA vs UTSI vs SIFY
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Information Technology Services
Aerospace & Defense
Communication Equipment
Telecommunications Services
LZMH vs CLPS vs CODA vs UTSI vs SIFY — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Information Technology Services | Information Technology Services | Aerospace & Defense | Communication Equipment | Telecommunications Services |
| Market Cap | $948K | $25M | $134M | $23M | $1.15B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $823M | $299M | $28M | $10M | $41.45B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $6M | $-4M | $4M | $-6M | $-1.50B |
| Gross Margin | 4.2% | 22.8% | 66.3% | 19.8% | 34.2% |
| Operating Margin | 0.4% | -1.4% | 17.4% | -80.5% | 5.2% |
| Forward P/E | 1.2x | — | 22.5x | — | — |
| Total Debt | $35M | $34M | $395K | $2M | $39.51B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $4M | $28M | $29M | $51M | $5.00B |
LZMH vs CLPS vs CODA vs UTSI vs SIFY — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Feb 25 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| LZ Technology Holdi… (LZMH) | 100 | 1.7 | -98.3% |
| CLPS Incorporation (CLPS) | 100 | 77.6 | -22.4% |
| Coda Octopus Group,… (CODA) | 100 | 158.1 | +58.1% |
| UTStarcom Holdings … (UTSI) | 100 | 108.7 | +8.7% |
| Sify Technologies L… (SIFY) | 100 | 351.4 | +251.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LZMH vs CLPS vs CODA vs UTSI vs SIFY
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LZMH has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure.
- Rev growth 44.6%, EPS growth 188.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 116.5%
- 44.6% revenue growth vs UTSI's -30.9%
- Better valuation composite
CLPS ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 3 yrs, beta 0.27, yield 14.6%
- Beta 0.27, yield 14.6%, current ratio 1.58x
- 14.6% yield, 3-year raise streak, vs SIFY's 0.0%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
CODA is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 8.4% 10Y total return vs SIFY's 141.0%
- 14.8% margin vs UTSI's -62.0%
- 6.6% ROA vs UTSI's -9.3%, ROIC 11.2% vs -32.7%
UTSI is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.20, Low D/E 3.5%, current ratio 2.92x
- Beta 0.20 vs SIFY's 1.33, lower leverage
SIFY is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +264.2% vs LZMH's -99.1%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 44.6% revenue growth vs UTSI's -30.9% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 14.8% margin vs UTSI's -62.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.20 vs SIFY's 1.33, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 14.6% yield, 3-year raise streak, vs SIFY's 0.0%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +264.2% vs LZMH's -99.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 6.6% ROA vs UTSI's -9.3%, ROIC 11.2% vs -32.7% |
LZMH vs CLPS vs CODA vs UTSI vs SIFY — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
LZMH vs CLPS vs CODA vs UTSI vs SIFY — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CODA leads in 2 of 6 categories
LZMH leads 1 • SIFY leads 1 • CLPS leads 1 • UTSI leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CODA leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SIFY is the larger business by revenue, generating $41.4B annually — 4232.2x UTSI's $10M. CODA is the more profitable business, keeping 14.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to UTSI's -62.0%. On growth, CODA holds the edge at +28.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $823M | $299M | $28M | $10M | $41.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | — | -$1M | $6M | -$8M | $8.1B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | — | -$4M | $4M | -$6M | -$1.5B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | — | $0 | $7M | -$7M | $0 |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +4.2% | +22.8% | +66.3% | +19.8% | +34.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +0.4% | -1.4% | +17.4% | -80.5% | +5.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +0.7% | -1.3% | +14.8% | -62.0% | -3.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +0.5% | -2.3% | +24.6% | -67.4% | -9.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +15.3% | +28.8% | -19.0% | +2.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +75.8% | +3.0% | -81.8% | -3.7% |
Valuation Metrics
LZMH leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 1.2x trailing earnings, LZMH trades at a 96% valuation discount to CODA's 32.2x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, LZMH's 3.0x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than SIFY's 18.2x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $947,541 | $25M | $134M | $23M | $1.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $6M | $31M | $106M | -$26M | $1.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 1.16x | -3.48x | 32.16x | -5.21x | -119.57x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 22.45x | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 7.51x | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 3.04x | — | 17.85x | — | 18.19x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.01x | 0.15x | 5.05x | 2.10x | 2.73x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.10x | 0.43x | 2.30x | 0.51x | 4.65x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 1.49x | — | 22.20x | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
CODA leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LZMH delivers a 8.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $9 in annual profit, vs $-14 for UTSI. CODA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to SIFY's 1.96x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CODA scores 7/9 vs UTSI's 1/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +8.6% | -6.1% | +7.2% | -13.9% | -7.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.9% | -3.2% | +6.6% | -9.3% | -1.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +3.0% | -7.9% | +11.2% | -32.7% | +3.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +5.4% | -9.8% | +8.1% | -14.6% | +4.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 2 | 7 | 1 | 3 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.52x | 0.59x | 0.01x | 0.04x | 1.96x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $31M | $6M | -$28M | -$49M | $34.5B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $4M | $28M | $29M | $51M | $5.0B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $35M | $34M | $394,932 | $2M | $39.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 4.75x | — | — | — | 0.82x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
SIFY leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CODA five years ago would be worth $14,969 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $191 for LZMH. Over the past 12 months, SIFY leads with a +264.2% total return vs LZMH's -99.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors SIFY at 28.8% vs LZMH's -73.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -93.2% | -10.3% | +25.1% | +5.9% | +29.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -99.1% | -5.4% | +78.9% | -7.4% | +264.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.1% | +0.5% | +34.5% | -33.7% | +113.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.1% | -69.3% | +49.7% | -50.4% | -12.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.1% | -78.5% | +844.4% | -69.5% | +141.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -73.3% | +0.2% | +10.4% | -12.8% | +28.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — LZMH and SIFY each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
LZMH is the less volatile stock with a -0.99 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than SIFY's 1.33 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. SIFY currently trades 89.0% from its 52-week high vs LZMH's 0.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -0.93x | 0.19x | 1.00x | 0.18x | 1.33x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $32.10 | $1.88 | $17.28 | $2.94 | $17.85 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.09 | $0.80 | $5.98 | $2.00 | $4.15 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +0.3% | +48.2% | +68.9% | +85.0% | +89.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 19.3 | 49.8 | 48.6 | 49.6 | 56.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 6.8M | 15K | 256K | 4K | 56K |
Analyst Outlook
CLPS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CODA as "Buy", SIFY as "Buy". CLPS is the only dividend payer here at 14.60% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | — | Buy | — | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | — | $14.00 | — | — |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | — | 1 | — | 1 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +14.6% | — | — | +0.0% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 3 | 0 | — | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.13 | — | — | $0.36 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
CODA leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). LZMH leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
LZMH vs CLPS vs CODA vs UTSI vs SIFY: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LZMH or CLPS or CODA or UTSI or SIFY a better buy right now?
For growth investors, LZ Technology Holdings Limited Class B Ordinary Shares (LZMH) is the stronger pick with 44.
6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -30. 9% for UTStarcom Holdings Corp. (UTSI). LZ Technology Holdings Limited Class B Ordinary Shares (LZMH) offers the better valuation at 1. 2x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Coda Octopus Group, Inc. (CODA) a "Buy" — based on 1 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 — LZMH or CLPS or CODA or UTSI or SIFY?
On trailing P/E, LZ Technology Holdings Limited Class B Ordinary Shares (LZMH) is the cheapest at 1.
2x versus Coda Octopus Group, Inc. at 32. 2x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — LZMH or CLPS or CODA or UTSI or SIFY?
Over the past 5 years, Coda Octopus Group, Inc.
(CODA) delivered a total return of +49. 7%, compared to -98. 1% for LZ Technology Holdings Limited Class B Ordinary Shares (LZMH). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CODA returned +844. 4% versus LZMH's -98. 1%. 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 — LZMH or CLPS or CODA or UTSI or SIFY?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), LZ Technology Holdings Limited Class B Ordinary Shares (LZMH) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
93β versus Sify Technologies Limited's 1. 33β — meaning SIFY is approximately -242% more volatile than LZMH relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Coda Octopus Group, Inc. (CODA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 196% for Sify Technologies Limited — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — LZMH or CLPS or CODA or UTSI or SIFY?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), LZ Technology Holdings Limited Class B Ordinary Shares (LZMH) is pulling ahead at 44.
6% versus -30. 9% for UTStarcom Holdings Corp. (UTSI). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: LZ Technology Holdings Limited Class B Ordinary Shares grew EPS 188. 9% year-over-year, compared to -877. 8% for Sify Technologies Limited. Over a 3-year CAGR, LZMH leads at 116. 5% 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 — LZMH or CLPS or CODA or UTSI or SIFY?
Coda Octopus Group, Inc.
(CODA) is the more profitable company, earning 15. 5% net margin versus -40. 2% for UTStarcom Holdings Corp. — meaning it keeps 15. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CODA leads at 17. 1% versus -67. 4% for UTSI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CODA leads at 66. 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.
07Which pays a better dividend — LZMH or CLPS or CODA or UTSI or SIFY?
In this comparison, CLPS (14.
6% yield) pays a dividend. LZMH, CODA, UTSI, SIFY do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
08Is LZMH or CLPS or CODA or UTSI or SIFY better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, LZ Technology Holdings Limited Class B Ordinary Shares (LZMH) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
93)). Both have compounded well over 10 years (LZMH: -98. 1%, SIFY: +141. 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.
09What are the main differences between LZMH and CLPS and CODA and UTSI and SIFY?
These companies operate in different sectors (LZMH (Technology) and CLPS (Technology) and CODA (Industrials) and UTSI (Technology) and SIFY (Communication Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: LZMH is a small-cap high-growth stock; CLPS is a small-cap high-growth stock; CODA is a small-cap high-growth stock; UTSI is a small-cap quality compounder stock; SIFY is a small-cap quality compounder stock. CLPS pays a dividend while LZMH, CODA, UTSI, SIFY 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.