NMR vs GS

For growth investors, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.

(GS) is the stronger pick with 17. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 5. 6% for Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR). Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR) offers the better valuation at 10. 7x trailing P/E (10. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR) a "Hold" — based on 9 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.

On trailing P/E, Nomura Holdings, Inc.

(NMR) is the cheapest at 10. 7x versus The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. at 23. 1x. On forward P/E, Nomura Holdings, Inc. is actually cheaper at 10. 0x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Nomura Holdings, Inc. wins at 0. 51x versus The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. 's 1. 13x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.

(GS) delivered a total return of +171. 1%, compared to +68. 7% for Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GS returned +536. 1% versus NMR's +146. 3%. 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), Nomura Holdings, Inc.

(NMR) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 32β versus The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. 's 1. 47β — meaning GS is approximately 11% more volatile than NMR relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 4% versus 5% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.

(GS) is pulling ahead at 17. 0% versus 5. 6% for Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. grew EPS 77. 3% year-over-year, compared to 7. 2% for Nomura Holdings, Inc.. 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.

The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.

(GS) is the more profitable company, earning 11. 3% net margin versus 7. 6% for Nomura Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 11. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: GS leads at 14. 5% versus 11. 3% for NMR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NMR leads at 45. 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.

The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.

By this metric, Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 51x versus The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. 's 1. 13x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR) trades at 10. 0x forward P/E versus 15. 8x for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. — 5. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for GS: 6. 2% to $995. 89.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Nomura Holdings, Inc. (NMR) offers the highest yield at 4. 6%, versus 1. 4% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS).

For long-horizon retirement investors, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.

(GS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (1. 4% yield, +536. 1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (GS: +536. 1%, NMR: +146. 3%), 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 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: NMR is a mid-cap deep-value stock; GS is a large-cap high-growth 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.