Asset Management
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
MCI vs PFLT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Asset Management
MCI vs PFLT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Asset Management | Asset Management |
| Market Cap | $357M | $914M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $43M | $172M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $32M | $34M |
| Gross Margin | 87.6% | 45.6% |
| Operating Margin | 86.7% | 39.4% |
| Forward P/E | 10.0x | 8.2x |
| Total Debt | $46M | $1.78B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $17M | $123M |
MCI vs PFLT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Barings Corporate I… (MCI) | 100 | 128.9 | +28.9% |
| PennantPark Floatin… (PFLT) | 100 | 110.7 | +10.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: MCI vs PFLT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
MCI carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 3 yrs, beta 0.17, yield 9.0%
- Rev growth 5.1%, EPS growth -3.8%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.17, Low D/E 13.3%, current ratio 1.99x
PFLT is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and defensive.
- 77.8% 10Y total return vs MCI's 73.3%
- Beta 0.79, yield 13.1%, current ratio 2.94x
- Lower P/E (8.2x vs 10.0x)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 5.1% NII/revenue growth vs PFLT's 2.2% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (8.2x vs 10.0x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.0% vs PFLT's 0.1% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.17 vs PFLT's 0.79, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 13.1% yield, 3-year raise streak, vs MCI's 9.0% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +3.7% vs MCI's -5.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.0% vs PFLT's 0.1% |
MCI vs PFLT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MCI leads this category, winning 5 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
PFLT is the larger business by revenue, generating $172M annually — 4.0x MCI's $43M. MCI is the more profitable business, keeping 82.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PFLT's 38.7%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $43M | $172M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $0 | $36M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $32M | $34M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $13M | $100M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +87.6% | +45.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +86.7% | +39.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +82.2% | +38.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +65.0% | +55.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -21.4% | -110.3% |
Valuation Metrics
PFLT leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 10.0x trailing earnings, MCI trades at a 22% valuation discount to PFLT's 12.8x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, MCI's 10.3x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than PFLT's 38.0x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $357M | $914M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $386M | $2.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 9.97x | 12.79x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 8.16x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.44x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 10.33x | 38.04x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 8.25x | 5.33x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.03x | 0.79x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 12.70x | 9.62x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MCI leads this category, winning 8 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MCI delivers a 9.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $9 in annual profit, vs $3 for PFLT. MCI carries lower financial leverage with a 0.13x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to PFLT's 1.65x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), PFLT scores 4/9 vs MCI's 3/9, reflecting mixed financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +9.1% | +3.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +8.0% | +1.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.3% | +2.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +9.6% | +2.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.13x | 1.65x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $29M | $1.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $17M | $123M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $46M | $1.8B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 43.24x | 0.36x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — MCI and PFLT each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MCI five years ago would be worth $15,987 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $11,941 for PFLT. Over the past 12 months, PFLT leads with a +3.7% total return vs MCI's -5.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MCI at 18.3% vs PFLT's 6.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -6.0% | +2.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -5.6% | +3.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +65.7% | +20.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +59.9% | +19.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +73.3% | +77.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +18.3% | +6.5% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MCI and PFLT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MCI is the less volatile stock with a 0.17 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than PFLT's 0.79 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. PFLT currently trades 84.7% from its 52-week high vs MCI's 75.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.17x | 0.79x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $23.00 | $10.88 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $17.24 | $7.68 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +75.9% | +84.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 37.2 | 66.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 43K | 984K |
Analyst Outlook
PFLT leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
For income investors, PFLT offers the higher dividend yield at 13.09% vs MCI's 8.99%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $10.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 11 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +9.0% | +13.1% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 3 | 3 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.57 | $1.21 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% |
MCI leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). PFLT leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). 2 tied.
MCI vs PFLT: Frequently Asked Questions
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is MCI or PFLT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Barings Corporate Investors (MCI) is the stronger pick with 5.
1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 2. 2% for PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd. (PFLT). Barings Corporate Investors (MCI) offers the better valuation at 10. 0x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd. (PFLT) a "Buy" — based on 11 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 — MCI or PFLT?
On trailing P/E, Barings Corporate Investors (MCI) is the cheapest at 10.
0x versus PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd. at 12. 8x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — MCI or PFLT?
Over the past 5 years, Barings Corporate Investors (MCI) delivered a total return of +59.
9%, compared to +19. 4% for PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd. (PFLT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: PFLT returned +77. 8% versus MCI's +73. 3%. 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 — MCI or PFLT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Barings Corporate Investors (MCI) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
17β versus PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd. 's 0. 79β — meaning PFLT is approximately 354% more volatile than MCI relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Barings Corporate Investors (MCI) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 13% versus 165% for PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — MCI or PFLT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Barings Corporate Investors (MCI) is pulling ahead at 5.
1% versus 2. 2% for PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd. (PFLT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Barings Corporate Investors grew EPS -3. 8% year-over-year, compared to -48. 6% for PennantPark Floating Rate Capital 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 — MCI or PFLT?
Barings Corporate Investors (MCI) is the more profitable company, earning 82.
2% net margin versus 38. 7% for PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd. — meaning it keeps 82. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MCI leads at 86. 7% versus 39. 4% for PFLT. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MCI leads at 87. 6%, 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 — MCI or PFLT?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd. (PFLT) offers the highest yield at 13. 1%, versus 9. 0% for Barings Corporate Investors (MCI).
08Is MCI or PFLT better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Barings Corporate Investors (MCI) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
17), 9. 0% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MCI: +73. 3%, PFLT: +77. 8%), 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 MCI and PFLT?
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.
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 both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.