Financial - Capital Markets
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
MFH vs FTFT vs RCON vs CLPS vs QFIN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Software - Application
Oil & Gas Equipment & Services
Information Technology Services
Financial - Credit Services
MFH vs FTFT vs RCON vs CLPS vs QFIN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Financial - Capital Markets | Software - Application | Oil & Gas Equipment & Services | Information Technology Services | Financial - Credit Services |
| Market Cap | $352M | $6M | $17M | $25M | $3.75B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1M | $4M | $66M | $299M | $17.17B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-14M | $-5M | $-43M | $-4M | $6.89B |
| Gross Margin | -37.3% | 10.7% | 23.0% | 22.8% | 61.8% |
| Operating Margin | -458.3% | -8.9% | -86.5% | -1.4% | 43.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | — | — | 0.5x |
| Total Debt | $8M | $2M | $34M | $34M | $1.65B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $24M | $2M | $99M | $28M | $4.45B |
MFH vs FTFT vs RCON vs CLPS vs QFIN — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | Jan 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mercurity Fintech H… (MFH) | 100 | 287.6 | +187.6% |
| Future FinTech Grou… (FTFT) | 100 | 1.3 | -98.7% |
| Recon Technology, L… (RCON) | 100 | 4.8 | -95.2% |
| CLPS Incorporation (CLPS) | 100 | 42.9 | -57.1% |
| Qfin Holdings, Inc. (QFIN) | 100 | 191.7 | +91.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: MFH vs FTFT vs RCON vs CLPS vs QFIN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
MFH ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth.
- 125.9% NII/revenue growth vs RCON's -3.7%
FTFT is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 77.5%, EPS growth 85.2%, 3Y rev CAGR -45.7%
RCON is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.47, Low D/E 7.6%, current ratio 5.88x
CLPS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit 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
- Beta 0.27 vs FTFT's 2.54
- 14.6% yield, 3-year raise streak, vs QFIN's 9.3%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
QFIN is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding and bank quality is your priority.
- 16.1% 10Y total return vs CLPS's -78.5%
- NIM 14.3% vs MFH's 0.6%
- Better valuation composite
- 36.5% margin vs MFH's -450.1%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 125.9% NII/revenue growth vs RCON's -3.7% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 36.5% margin vs MFH's -450.1% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.27 vs FTFT's 2.54 | |
| Dividends | 14.6% yield, 3-year raise streak, vs QFIN's 9.3%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | -5.4% vs QFIN's -63.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 12.2% ROA vs MFH's -38.9%, ROIC 23.1% vs -11.7% |
MFH vs FTFT vs RCON vs CLPS vs QFIN — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
MFH vs FTFT vs RCON vs CLPS vs QFIN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CLPS leads in 2 of 6 categories
QFIN leads 1 • MFH leads 0 • FTFT leads 0 • RCON leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — FTFT and QFIN each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
QFIN is the larger business by revenue, generating $17.2B annually — 17039.1x MFH's $1M. QFIN is the more profitable business, keeping 36.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to MFH's -4.5%. On growth, FTFT holds the edge at +110.9% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1M | $4M | $66M | $299M | $17.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$12M | -$34M | -$54M | -$1M | $8.0B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$14M | -$5M | -$43M | -$4M | $6.9B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$9M | $56.6B | -$44M | $0 | $10.8B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -37.3% | +10.7% | +23.0% | +22.8% | +61.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -4.6% | -8.9% | -86.5% | -1.4% | +43.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -4.5% | -120.6% | -64.3% | -1.3% | +36.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -3.6% | +14767.2% | -65.9% | -2.3% | +53.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +110.9% | +2.6% | +15.3% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +93.4% | +100.0% | +35.7% | +75.8% | -9.7% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — MFH and FTFT and CLPS each lead in 1 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $352M | $6M | $17M | $25M | $3.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $335M | $6M | $7M | $31M | $3.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -68.32x | -0.54x | -1.22x | -3.48x | 2.15x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | — | 0.47x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | 0.11x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | — | 2.99x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 349.01x | 1.65x | 1.72x | 0.15x | 1.49x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 12.86x | 0.06x | 0.11x | 0.43x | 0.56x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — | 2.78x |
Profitability & Efficiency
QFIN leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
QFIN delivers a 28.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $29 in annual profit, vs $-58 for MFH. FTFT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.04x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CLPS's 0.59x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), QFIN scores 7/9 vs CLPS's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -57.7% | -16.4% | -9.2% | -6.1% | +28.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -38.9% | -11.9% | -8.0% | -3.2% | +12.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -11.7% | -97.5% | -10.6% | -7.9% | +23.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -21.9% | -117.5% | -11.8% | -9.8% | +35.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.32x | 0.04x | 0.08x | 0.59x | 0.07x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$16M | -$457,223 | -$64M | $6M | -$2.8B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $24M | $2M | $99M | $28M | $4.5B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $8M | $2M | $34M | $34M | $1.7B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -17.73x | -228.78x | -372.30x | — | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — MFH and QFIN each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in QFIN five years ago would be worth $8,090 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $55 for RCON. Over the past 12 months, CLPS leads with a -5.4% total return vs QFIN's -63.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MFH at 47.1% vs FTFT's -53.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +14.1% | +66.7% | -45.8% | -10.3% | -22.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -18.8% | -16.1% | -49.1% | -5.4% | -63.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +218.1% | -90.2% | -88.7% | +0.5% | +0.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -20.5% | -99.3% | -99.4% | -69.3% | -19.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -94.0% | -98.8% | -99.3% | -78.5% | +16.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +47.1% | -53.9% | -51.6% | +0.2% | +0.2% |
Risk & Volatility
CLPS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CLPS is the less volatile stock with a 0.27 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than FTFT's 2.54 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CLPS currently trades 48.2% from its 52-week high vs RCON's 11.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.02x | 2.54x | 0.47x | 0.27x | 1.20x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $36.77 | $4.03 | $7.16 | $1.88 | $47.00 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.38 | $0.56 | $0.75 | $0.80 | $12.30 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +13.8% | +31.0% | +11.7% | +48.2% | +28.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 38.4 | 46.4 | 42.5 | 49.8 | 53.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 170K | 108K | 90K | 15K | 1.4M |
Analyst Outlook
CLPS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
For income investors, CLPS offers the higher dividend yield at 14.60% vs QFIN's 9.26%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | — | — | — | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | — | — | — | $28.15 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | — | — | — | 4 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +14.6% | +9.3% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $0.13 | $8.32 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +11.6% |
CLPS leads in 2 of 6 categories (Risk & Volatility, Analyst Outlook). QFIN leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
MFH vs FTFT vs RCON vs CLPS vs QFIN: Key Questions Answered
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is MFH or FTFT or RCON or CLPS or QFIN a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Mercurity Fintech Holding Inc.
(MFH) is the stronger pick with 125. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 7% for Recon Technology, Ltd. (RCON). Qfin Holdings, Inc. (QFIN) offers the better valuation at 2. 1x trailing P/E (0. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Qfin Holdings, Inc. (QFIN) a "Buy" — based on 4 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 is the better long-term investment — MFH or FTFT or RCON or CLPS or QFIN?
Over the past 5 years, Qfin Holdings, Inc.
(QFIN) delivered a total return of -19. 1%, compared to -99. 4% for Recon Technology, Ltd. (RCON). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: QFIN returned +16. 1% versus RCON's -99. 3%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — MFH or FTFT or RCON or CLPS or QFIN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), CLPS Incorporation (CLPS) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
27β versus Future FinTech Group Inc. 's 2. 54β — meaning FTFT is approximately 835% more volatile than CLPS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Future FinTech Group Inc. (FTFT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 4% versus 59% for CLPS Incorporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — MFH or FTFT or RCON or CLPS or QFIN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Mercurity Fintech Holding Inc.
(MFH) is pulling ahead at 125. 9% versus -3. 7% for Recon Technology, Ltd. (RCON). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Future FinTech Group Inc. grew EPS 85. 2% year-over-year, compared to -181. 4% for CLPS Incorporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, CLPS leads at 2. 7% 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.
05Which has better profit margins — MFH or FTFT or RCON or CLPS or QFIN?
Qfin Holdings, Inc.
(QFIN) is the more profitable company, earning 36. 5% net margin versus -450. 1% for Mercurity Fintech Holding Inc. — meaning it keeps 36. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: QFIN leads at 43. 9% versus -888. 0% for FTFT. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — QFIN leads at 61. 8%, 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.
06Which pays a better dividend — MFH or FTFT or RCON or CLPS or QFIN?
In this comparison, CLPS (14.
6% yield), QFIN (9. 3% yield) pay a dividend. MFH, FTFT, RCON do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
07Is MFH or FTFT or RCON or CLPS or QFIN better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, CLPS Incorporation (CLPS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
27), 14. 6% yield). Future FinTech Group Inc. (FTFT) carries a higher beta of 2. 54 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (CLPS: -78. 5%, FTFT: -98. 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.
08What are the main differences between MFH and FTFT and RCON and CLPS and QFIN?
These companies operate in different sectors (MFH (Financial Services) and FTFT (Technology) and RCON (Energy) and CLPS (Technology) and QFIN (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: MFH is a small-cap high-growth stock; FTFT is a small-cap high-growth stock; RCON is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CLPS is a small-cap high-growth stock; QFIN is a small-cap deep-value stock. CLPS, QFIN pay a dividend while MFH, FTFT, RCON 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.