Asset Management
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
NMFC vs CGBD
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Asset Management
NMFC vs CGBD — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Asset Management | Asset Management |
| Market Cap | $806M | $866M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $370M | $168M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-58M | $74M |
| Gross Margin | 83.6% | 59.2% |
| Operating Margin | 38.0% | 54.7% |
| Forward P/E | 7.7x | 8.2x |
| Total Debt | $1.67B | $968M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $81M | $30M |
NMFC vs CGBD — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| New Mountain Financ… (NMFC) | 100 | 89.8 | -10.2% |
| Carlyle Secured Len… (CGBD) | 100 | 133.3 | +33.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NMFC vs CGBD
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NMFC carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.59, yield 13.1%
- Rev growth 12.3%, EPS growth -86.4%
- 76.4% 10Y total return vs CGBD's 48.4%
CGBD is the clearest fit if your priority is quality and efficiency.
- Efficiency ratio 0.0% vs NMFC's 0.5% (lower = leaner)
- Efficiency ratio 0.0% vs NMFC's 0.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 12.3% NII/revenue growth vs CGBD's -2.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.7x vs 8.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.0% vs NMFC's 0.5% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.59 vs CGBD's 0.61 | |
| Dividends | 13.1% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs CGBD's 0.2% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | -3.4% vs CGBD's -5.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.0% vs NMFC's 0.5% |
NMFC vs CGBD — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CGBD leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NMFC is the larger business by revenue, generating $370M annually — 2.2x CGBD's $168M. CGBD is the more profitable business, keeping 53.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NMFC's 4.5%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $370M | $168M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $83M | $76M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$58M | $74M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $676M | -$53M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +83.6% | +59.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +38.0% | +54.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +4.5% | +53.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +102.4% | +62.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -3.3% | -5.7% |
Valuation Metrics
NMFC leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 7.5x trailing earnings, CGBD trades at a 88% valuation discount to NMFC's 60.9x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, NMFC's 7.9x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than CGBD's 19.7x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $806M | $866M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.4B | $1.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 60.93x | 7.52x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 7.67x | 8.20x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.82x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 7.90x | 19.67x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.18x | 5.16x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.87x | 0.74x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 2.13x | 8.31x |
Profitability & Efficiency
CGBD leads this category, winning 8 of 8 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CGBD delivers a 6.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $6 in annual profit, vs $-5 for NMFC. CGBD carries lower financial leverage with a 1.07x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NMFC's 1.41x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -4.8% | +6.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -2.0% | +2.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +3.5% | +3.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +4.8% | +4.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.41x | 1.07x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.6B | $938M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $81M | $30M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.7B | $968M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.00x | 0.95x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CGBD leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CGBD five years ago would be worth $15,130 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $11,637 for NMFC. Over the past 12 months, NMFC leads with a -3.4% total return vs CGBD's -5.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CGBD at 8.2% vs NMFC's 2.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -4.0% | -2.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -3.4% | -5.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +8.8% | +26.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +16.4% | +51.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +76.4% | +48.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +2.9% | +8.2% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — NMFC and CGBD each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
NMFC is the less volatile stock with a 0.59 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CGBD's 0.61 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CGBD currently trades 82.0% from its 52-week high vs NMFC's 77.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.59x | 0.61x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $11.04 | $14.49 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $7.47 | $10.61 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +77.3% | +82.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 56.1 | 62.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.2M | 805K |
Analyst Outlook
NMFC leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates NMFC as "Hold" and CGBD as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 26.3% upside for CGBD (target: $15) vs 23.1% for NMFC (target: $11). For income investors, NMFC offers the higher dividend yield at 13.14% vs CGBD's 0.19%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $10.50 | $15.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 12 | 7 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +13.1% | +0.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.12 | $0.02 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +6.4% | 0.0% |
CGBD leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). NMFC leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
NMFC vs CGBD: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NMFC or CGBD a better buy right now?
For growth investors, New Mountain Finance Corporation (NMFC) is the stronger pick with 12.
3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -2. 9% for Carlyle Secured Lending, Inc. (CGBD). Carlyle Secured Lending, Inc. (CGBD) offers the better valuation at 7. 5x trailing P/E (8. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate New Mountain Finance Corporation (NMFC) a "Hold" — based on 12 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 — NMFC or CGBD?
On trailing P/E, Carlyle Secured Lending, Inc.
(CGBD) is the cheapest at 7. 5x versus New Mountain Finance Corporation at 60. 9x. On forward P/E, New Mountain Finance Corporation is actually cheaper at 7. 7x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — NMFC or CGBD?
Over the past 5 years, Carlyle Secured Lending, Inc.
(CGBD) delivered a total return of +51. 3%, compared to +16. 4% for New Mountain Finance Corporation (NMFC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NMFC returned +76. 4% versus CGBD's +48. 4%. 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 — NMFC or CGBD?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), New Mountain Finance Corporation (NMFC) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
59β versus Carlyle Secured Lending, Inc. 's 0. 61β — meaning CGBD is approximately 4% more volatile than NMFC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Carlyle Secured Lending, Inc. (CGBD) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 107% versus 141% for New Mountain Finance Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — NMFC or CGBD?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), New Mountain Finance Corporation (NMFC) is pulling ahead at 12.
3% versus -2. 9% for Carlyle Secured Lending, Inc. (CGBD). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Carlyle Secured Lending, Inc. grew EPS -3. 7% year-over-year, compared to -86. 4% for New Mountain Finance Corporation. 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 — NMFC or CGBD?
Carlyle Secured Lending, Inc.
(CGBD) is the more profitable company, earning 53. 0% net margin versus 4. 5% for New Mountain Finance Corporation — meaning it keeps 53. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CGBD leads at 54. 7% versus 38. 0% for NMFC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NMFC leads at 83. 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.
07Is NMFC or CGBD more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, New Mountain Finance Corporation (NMFC) trades at 7.
7x forward P/E versus 8. 2x for Carlyle Secured Lending, Inc. — 0. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CGBD: 26. 3% to $15. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — NMFC or CGBD?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
New Mountain Finance Corporation (NMFC) offers the highest yield at 13. 1%, versus 0. 2% for Carlyle Secured Lending, Inc. (CGBD).
09Is NMFC or CGBD better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, New Mountain Finance Corporation (NMFC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
59), 13. 1% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (NMFC: +76. 4%, CGBD: +48. 4%), 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 NMFC and CGBD?
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.
In terms of investment character: NMFC is a small-cap income-oriented stock; CGBD is a small-cap deep-value stock. NMFC pays a dividend while CGBD does 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 both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.