PAX vs CG

For growth investors, The Carlyle Group Inc.

(CG) is the stronger pick with 19. 8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 2. 6% for Patria Investments Limited (PAX). The Carlyle Group Inc. (CG) offers the better valuation at 23. 3x trailing P/E (11. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Patria Investments Limited (PAX) a "Buy" — based on 5 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, The Carlyle Group Inc.

(CG) is the cheapest at 23. 3x versus Patria Investments Limited at 23. 9x. On forward P/E, Patria Investments Limited is actually cheaper at 9. 0x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, The Carlyle Group Inc.

(CG) delivered a total return of +27. 9%, compared to +14. 0% for Patria Investments Limited (PAX). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CG returned +292. 7% versus PAX's -14. 9%. 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), Patria Investments Limited (PAX) is the lower-risk stock at 1.

09β versus The Carlyle Group Inc. 's 1. 88β — meaning CG is approximately 72% more volatile than PAX relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Patria Investments Limited (PAX) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 27% versus 197% for The Carlyle Group Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

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

(CG) is pulling ahead at 19. 8% versus 2. 6% for Patria Investments Limited (PAX). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Patria Investments Limited grew EPS 14. 9% year-over-year, compared to -21. 3% for The Carlyle Group 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.

Patria Investments Limited (PAX) is the more profitable company, earning 22.

3% net margin versus 16. 5% for The Carlyle Group Inc. — meaning it keeps 22. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: PAX leads at 34. 2% versus 26. 2% for CG. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — PAX leads at 96. 2%, 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.

On forward earnings alone, Patria Investments Limited (PAX) trades at 9.

0x forward P/E versus 11. 8x for The Carlyle Group Inc. — 2. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PAX: 39. 3% to $18. 00.

In this comparison, CG (2.

7% yield) pays a dividend. PAX does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, The Carlyle Group Inc.

(CG) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (2. 7% yield, +292. 7% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CG: +292. 7%, PAX: -14. 9%), 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: PAX is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CG is a mid-cap high-growth stock. CG pays a dividend while PAX 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.