Shell Companies
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
NPAC vs BFLY vs SONO vs PSFE vs AMZN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Devices
Consumer Electronics
Information Technology Services
Specialty Retail
NPAC vs BFLY vs SONO vs PSFE vs AMZN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Shell Companies | Medical - Devices | Consumer Electronics | Information Technology Services | Specialty Retail |
| Market Cap | $67K | $1.09B | $1.82B | $480M | $2.93T |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $103M | $1.46B | $1.70B | $742.78B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-222.00 | $-76M | $-41M | $-183M | $90.80B |
| Gross Margin | — | 49.2% | 44.8% | 52.4% | 50.6% |
| Operating Margin | — | -79.5% | 2.0% | 5.6% | 11.5% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 47.8x | 4.3x | 31.4x |
| Total Debt | $68.00 | $20M | $60M | $2.66B | $152.99B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $0.00 | $150M | $175M | $1.35B | $86.81B |
NPAC vs BFLY vs SONO vs PSFE vs AMZN — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 25 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| New Providence Acqu… (NPAC) | 100 | 102.4 | +2.4% |
| Butterfly Network, … (BFLY) | 100 | 173.3 | +73.3% |
| Sonos, Inc. (SONO) | 100 | 146.4 | +46.4% |
| Paysafe Limited (PSFE) | 100 | 75.1 | -24.9% |
| Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) | 100 | 133.0 | +33.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NPAC vs BFLY vs SONO vs PSFE vs AMZN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NPAC ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability.
- beta 0.02
- Beta 0.02 vs BFLY's 3.23
BFLY has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure.
- Rev growth 19.0%, EPS growth 8.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 10.0%
- 19.0% revenue growth vs SONO's -4.9%
- +83.3% vs PSFE's -39.7%
SONO is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.72, Low D/E 16.8%, current ratio 1.43x
- Beta 1.72, current ratio 1.43x
PSFE is the clearest fit if your priority is value.
- Lower P/E (4.3x vs 31.4x)
AMZN is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 7.0% 10Y total return vs NPAC's 2.4%
- 12.2% margin vs BFLY's -73.6%
- 11.5% ROA vs NPAC's -286.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 19.0% revenue growth vs SONO's -4.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (4.3x vs 31.4x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 12.2% margin vs BFLY's -73.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.02 vs BFLY's 3.23 | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 5 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +83.3% vs PSFE's -39.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 11.5% ROA vs NPAC's -286.5% |
NPAC vs BFLY vs SONO vs PSFE vs AMZN — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
NPAC vs BFLY vs SONO vs PSFE vs AMZN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
AMZN leads in 3 of 6 categories
PSFE leads 1 • NPAC leads 0 • BFLY leads 0 • SONO leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AMZN leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AMZN and NPAC operate at a comparable scale, with $742.8B and $0 in trailing revenue. AMZN is the more profitable business, keeping 12.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BFLY's -73.6%. On growth, BFLY holds the edge at +25.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $103M | $1.5B | $1.7B | $742.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | — | -$76M | $61M | $371M | $155.9B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | — | -$76M | -$41M | -$183M | $90.8B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | — | -$19M | $118M | $136M | -$2.5B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +49.2% | +44.8% | +52.4% | +50.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | -79.5% | +2.0% | +5.6% | +11.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | -73.6% | -2.8% | -10.7% | +12.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | -18.3% | +8.1% | +8.0% | -0.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +25.0% | +8.4% | +4.4% | +16.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +16.0% | -29.3% | -183.3% | +74.8% |
Valuation Metrics
PSFE leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, PSFE's 4.5x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than SONO's 143.7x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $67,371 | $1.1B | $1.8B | $480M | $2.93T |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $67,439 | $958M | $1.7B | $1.8B | $3.00T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -302.79x | -13.42x | -29.51x | -2.96x | 38.03x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 47.77x | 4.25x | 31.41x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | 1.36x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 143.75x | 4.52x | 20.58x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 11.15x | 1.26x | 0.28x | 4.09x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 9999.00x | 5.25x | 5.12x | 0.82x | 7.18x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 16.81x | 2.14x | 381.09x |
Profitability & Efficiency
AMZN leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
AMZN delivers a 23.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $23 in annual profit, vs $-34 for NPAC. BFLY carries lower financial leverage with a 0.10x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NPAC's 10.51x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), AMZN scores 6/9 vs BFLY's 3/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -34.3% | -36.8% | -10.4% | -24.1% | +23.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -2.9% | -25.6% | -4.8% | -3.8% | +11.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | -76.8% | -13.4% | +3.6% | +14.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -34.3% | -39.3% | -9.9% | +3.6% | +15.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 10.51x | 0.10x | 0.17x | 4.06x | 0.37x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $68 | -$130M | -$115M | $1.3B | $66.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $0 | $150M | $175M | $1.3B | $86.8B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $68 | $20M | $60M | $2.7B | $153.0B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | -71.59x | 2587.88x | 0.84x | 39.96x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
AMZN leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in AMZN five years ago would be worth $17,094 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $570 for PSFE. Over the past 12 months, BFLY leads with a +83.3% total return vs PSFE's -39.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors AMZN at 37.1% vs PSFE's -13.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +0.4% | +10.9% | -14.0% | +16.3% | +20.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +2.4% | +83.3% | +52.9% | -39.7% | +42.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +2.4% | +97.2% | -30.9% | -35.7% | +157.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +2.4% | -62.9% | -56.8% | -94.3% | +70.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +2.4% | -58.0% | -24.4% | -92.2% | +702.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +0.8% | +25.4% | -11.6% | -13.7% | +37.1% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — NPAC and AMZN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
NPAC is the less volatile stock with a 0.02 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than BFLY's 3.23 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. AMZN currently trades 97.9% from its 52-week high vs PSFE's 56.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.02x | 3.23x | 1.72x | 2.33x | 1.50x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $10.87 | $5.72 | $19.82 | $16.49 | $278.56 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $10.00 | $1.32 | $9.23 | $5.95 | $188.82 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +95.0% | +72.7% | +75.9% | +56.3% | +97.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 59.7 | 41.6 | 57.5 | 66.9 | 74.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 137K | 5.2M | 1.3M | 354K | 45.2M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: BFLY as "Buy", SONO as "Buy", PSFE as "Buy", AMZN as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 30.3% upside for BFLY (target: $5) vs 7.8% for PSFE (target: $10).
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $5.42 | $19.50 | $10.00 | $306.77 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 7 | 9 | 11 | 94 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +4.5% | +21.1% | 0.0% |
AMZN leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). PSFE leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
NPAC vs BFLY vs SONO vs PSFE vs AMZN: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NPAC or BFLY or SONO or PSFE or AMZN a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Butterfly Network, Inc.
(BFLY) is the stronger pick with 19. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -4. 9% for Sonos, Inc. (SONO). Amazon. com, Inc. (AMZN) offers the better valuation at 38. 0x trailing P/E (31. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Butterfly Network, Inc. (BFLY) a "Buy" — based on 7 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 — NPAC or BFLY or SONO or PSFE or AMZN?
On forward P/E, Paysafe Limited is actually cheaper at 4.
3x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — NPAC or BFLY or SONO or PSFE or AMZN?
Over the past 5 years, Amazon.
com, Inc. (AMZN) delivered a total return of +70. 9%, compared to -94. 3% for Paysafe Limited (PSFE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AMZN returned +702. 2% versus PSFE's -92. 2%. 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 — NPAC or BFLY or SONO or PSFE or AMZN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), New Providence Acquisition Corp.
III (NPAC) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 02β versus Butterfly Network, Inc. 's 3. 23β — meaning BFLY is approximately 17269% more volatile than NPAC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Butterfly Network, Inc. (BFLY) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 10% versus 11% for New Providence Acquisition Corp. III — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — NPAC or BFLY or SONO or PSFE or AMZN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Butterfly Network, Inc.
(BFLY) is pulling ahead at 19. 0% versus -4. 9% for Sonos, Inc. (SONO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Amazon. com, Inc. grew EPS 29. 7% year-over-year, compared to -972. 2% for Paysafe Limited. Over a 3-year CAGR, AMZN leads at 11. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — NPAC or BFLY or SONO or PSFE or AMZN?
Amazon.
com, Inc. (AMZN) is the more profitable company, earning 10. 8% net margin versus -79. 0% for Butterfly Network, Inc. — meaning it keeps 10. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: AMZN leads at 11. 2% versus -88. 5% for BFLY. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — AMZN leads at 50. 3%, 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 NPAC or BFLY or SONO or PSFE or AMZN more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Paysafe Limited (PSFE) trades at 4.
3x forward P/E versus 47. 8x for Sonos, Inc. — 43. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for BFLY: 30. 3% to $5. 42.
08Which pays a better dividend — NPAC or BFLY or SONO or PSFE or AMZN?
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.
09Is NPAC or BFLY or SONO or PSFE or AMZN better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, New Providence Acquisition Corp.
III (NPAC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 02)). Paysafe Limited (PSFE) carries a higher beta of 2. 33 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (NPAC: +2. 4%, PSFE: -92. 2%), 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 NPAC and BFLY and SONO and PSFE and AMZN?
These companies operate in different sectors (NPAC (Financial Services) and BFLY (Healthcare) and SONO (Technology) and PSFE (Technology) and AMZN (Consumer Cyclical)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: NPAC is a small-cap quality compounder stock; BFLY is a small-cap high-growth stock; SONO is a small-cap quality compounder stock; PSFE is a small-cap quality compounder stock; AMZN is a mega-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.
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.