Financial - Mortgages
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
PAPL vs UWMC vs RKT vs TREE
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Mortgages
Financial - Mortgages
Financial - Conglomerates
PAPL vs UWMC vs RKT vs TREE — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Financial - Mortgages | Financial - Mortgages | Financial - Mortgages | Financial - Conglomerates |
| Market Cap | $2M | $526M | $39.90B | $552M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $3M | $3.16B | $6.88B | $1.12B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-9M | $27M | $-68M | $181M |
| Gross Margin | 44.9% | 85.6% | 91.6% | 94.3% |
| Operating Margin | -98.7% | 58.0% | 8.7% | 7.3% |
| Forward P/E | — | 8.0x | 19.3x | 7.1x |
| Total Debt | $1M | $14.44B | $0.00 | $435M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $2M | $503M | $2.70B | $81M |
PAPL vs UWMC vs RKT vs TREE — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Nov 23 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pineapple Financial… (PAPL) | 100 | 3.9 | -96.1% |
| UWM Holdings Corpor… (UWMC) | 100 | 62.0 | -38.0% |
| Rocket Companies, I… (RKT) | 100 | 151.3 | +51.3% |
| LendingTree, Inc. (TREE) | 100 | 225.0 | +125.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: PAPL vs UWMC vs RKT vs TREE
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
PAPL lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
UWMC carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 1.50, yield 100.0%
- Rev growth 65.8%, EPS growth -7.7%
- 65.8% NII/revenue growth vs PAPL's 11.1%
- Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs PAPL's 1.4% (lower = leaner)
RKT is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- -20.7% 10Y total return vs UWMC's -41.1%
- +21.6% vs PAPL's -48.5%
TREE is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.55, current ratio 1.75x
- Beta 1.55, current ratio 1.75x
- Lower P/E (7.1x vs 19.3x)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 65.8% NII/revenue growth vs PAPL's 11.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.1x vs 19.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs PAPL's 1.4% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.50 vs RKT's 1.77 | |
| Dividends | 100.0% yield; 1-year raise streak; the other 3 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +21.6% vs PAPL's -48.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs PAPL's 1.4% |
PAPL vs UWMC vs RKT vs TREE — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
PAPL vs UWMC vs RKT vs TREE — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
TREE leads in 2 of 6 categories
UWMC leads 1 • RKT leads 1 • PAPL leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TREE leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
RKT is the larger business by revenue, generating $6.9B annually — 2303.5x PAPL's $3M. TREE is the more profitable business, keeping 13.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PAPL's -121.8%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $3M | $3.2B | $6.9B | $1.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$8M | $695M | $639M | $120M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$9M | $27M | -$68M | $181M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$1M | -$2.7B | -$4.1B | $73M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +44.9% | +85.6% | +91.6% | +94.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -98.7% | +58.0% | +8.7% | +7.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -121.8% | +0.9% | -1.0% | +13.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -31.7% | -86.1% | -58.4% | +5.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -51.1% | — | -89.6% | +2.3% |
Valuation Metrics
UWMC leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 3.7x trailing earnings, TREE trades at a 87% valuation discount to UWMC's 28.2x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, UWMC's 7.7x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than RKT's 41.8x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2M | $526M | $39.9B | $552M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $750,792 | $14.5B | $37.2B | $906M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.21x | 28.17x | -282.60x | 3.69x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 8.01x | 19.30x | 7.11x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 7.68x | 41.81x | 8.73x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.52x | 0.17x | 5.80x | 0.49x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.84x | 0.45x | 0.82x | 1.95x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | 9.09x |
Profitability & Efficiency
TREE leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
TREE delivers a 86.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $86 in annual profit, vs $-3 for PAPL. PAPL carries lower financial leverage with a 1.47x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to UWMC's 9.06x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), TREE scores 6/9 vs RKT's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -3.2% | +1.7% | -0.6% | +86.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -88.6% | +0.2% | -0.2% | +21.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -96.9% | +8.9% | +2.0% | +9.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -115.3% | +19.0% | +1.6% | +13.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.47x | 9.06x | — | 1.52x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$788,292 | $13.9B | -$2.7B | $354M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $2M | $503M | $2.7B | $81M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1M | $14.4B | $0 | $435M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -21.03x | 0.75x | 0.43x | 4.45x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
RKT leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in RKT five years ago would be worth $8,811 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $254 for PAPL. Over the past 12 months, RKT leads with a +21.6% total return vs PAPL's -48.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors TREE at 28.5% vs PAPL's -70.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -7.0% | -21.1% | -28.9% | -22.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -48.5% | -7.4% | +21.6% | +6.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -97.5% | -21.7% | +77.3% | +112.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -97.5% | -22.7% | -11.9% | -78.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -97.5% | -41.1% | -20.7% | -45.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -70.6% | -7.8% | +21.0% | +28.5% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — PAPL and RKT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
PAPL is the less volatile stock with a -0.01 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than RKT's 1.77 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. RKT currently trades 58.0% from its 52-week high vs PAPL's 12.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -0.01x | 1.50x | 1.77x | 1.55x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $9.53 | $7.14 | $24.36 | $77.35 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.20 | $3.27 | $11.08 | $32.65 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +12.0% | +47.3% | +58.0% | +51.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 57.1 | 42.1 | 45.8 | 39.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 4.2M | 15.7M | 25.0M | 326K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — UWMC and RKT each lead in 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: UWMC as "Hold", RKT as "Hold", TREE as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 76.9% upside for UWMC (target: $6) vs 53.1% for RKT (target: $22). UWMC is the only dividend payer here at 100.00% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $5.98 | $21.63 | $69.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 13 | 25 | 23 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +100.0% | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $3.39 | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +31.7% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
TREE leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). UWMC leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
PAPL vs UWMC vs RKT vs TREE: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is PAPL or UWMC or RKT or TREE a better buy right now?
For growth investors, UWM Holdings Corporation (UWMC) is the stronger pick with 65.
8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 11. 1% for Pineapple Financial Inc. (PAPL). LendingTree, Inc. (TREE) offers the better valuation at 3. 7x trailing P/E (7. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate LendingTree, Inc. (TREE) a "Buy" — based on 23 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 — PAPL or UWMC or RKT or TREE?
On trailing P/E, LendingTree, Inc.
(TREE) is the cheapest at 3. 7x versus UWM Holdings Corporation at 28. 2x. On forward P/E, LendingTree, Inc. is actually cheaper at 7. 1x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — PAPL or UWMC or RKT or TREE?
Over the past 5 years, Rocket Companies, Inc.
(RKT) delivered a total return of -11. 9%, compared to -97. 5% for Pineapple Financial Inc. (PAPL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: RKT returned -20. 7% versus PAPL's -97. 5%. 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 — PAPL or UWMC or RKT or TREE?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Pineapple Financial Inc.
(PAPL) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 01β versus Rocket Companies, Inc. 's 1. 77β — meaning RKT is approximately -16217% more volatile than PAPL relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Pineapple Financial Inc. (PAPL) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 147% versus 9% for UWM Holdings Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — PAPL or UWMC or RKT or TREE?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), UWM Holdings Corporation (UWMC) is pulling ahead at 65.
8% versus 11. 1% for Pineapple Financial Inc. (PAPL). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: LendingTree, Inc. grew EPS 443. 3% year-over-year, compared to -857. 9% for Pineapple Financial 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.
06Which has better profit margins — PAPL or UWMC or RKT or TREE?
LendingTree, Inc.
(TREE) is the more profitable company, earning 13. 5% net margin versus -121. 8% for Pineapple Financial Inc. — meaning it keeps 13. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: UWMC leads at 58. 0% versus -98. 7% for PAPL. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — TREE leads at 94. 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 PAPL or UWMC or RKT or TREE more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, LendingTree, Inc.
(TREE) trades at 7. 1x forward P/E versus 19. 3x for Rocket Companies, Inc. — 12. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for UWMC: 76. 9% to $5. 98.
08Which pays a better dividend — PAPL or UWMC or RKT or TREE?
In this comparison, UWMC (100.
0% yield) pays a dividend. PAPL, RKT, TREE do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is PAPL or UWMC or RKT or TREE better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Pineapple Financial Inc.
(PAPL) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 01)). Rocket Companies, Inc. (RKT) carries a higher beta of 1. 77 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (PAPL: -97. 5%, RKT: -20. 7%), 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 PAPL and UWMC and RKT and TREE?
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: PAPL is a small-cap quality compounder stock; UWMC is a small-cap high-growth stock; RKT is a mid-cap high-growth stock; TREE is a small-cap high-growth stock. UWMC pays a dividend while PAPL, RKT, TREE 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.