MAT vs FNKO

For growth investors, Mattel, Inc.

(MAT) is the stronger pick with -0. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -13. 5% for Funko, Inc. (FNKO). Mattel, Inc. (MAT) offers the better valuation at 12. 4x trailing P/E (11. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Mattel, Inc. (MAT) a "Buy" — based on 34 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.

Over the past 5 years, Mattel, Inc.

(MAT) delivered a total return of -29. 1%, compared to -77. 3% for Funko, Inc. (FNKO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: FNKO returned -25. 6% versus MAT's -43. 8%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Mattel, Inc.

(MAT) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 25β versus Funko, Inc. 's 3. 20β — meaning FNKO is approximately 156% more volatile than MAT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Mattel, Inc. (MAT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 128% versus 157% for Funko, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Mattel, Inc.

(MAT) is pulling ahead at -0. 6% versus -13. 5% for Funko, Inc. (FNKO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Mattel, Inc. grew EPS -21. 5% year-over-year, compared to -342. 9% for Funko, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, MAT leads at -0. 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.

Mattel, Inc.

(MAT) is the more profitable company, earning 7. 4% net margin versus -7. 4% for Funko, Inc. — meaning it keeps 7. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MAT leads at 11. 6% versus -5. 0% for FNKO. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MAT leads at 48. 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.

Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MAT: 25.

3% to $19. 29.

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.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Mattel, Inc.

(MAT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 25)). Funko, Inc. (FNKO) carries a higher beta of 3. 20 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (MAT: -43. 8%, FNKO: -25. 6%), 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.

Both stocks operate in the Consumer Cyclical sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

In terms of investment character: MAT is a small-cap deep-value stock; FNKO is a small-cap quality compounder 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.