Asset Management
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
PLTS vs CWAN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Software - Application
PLTS vs CWAN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Asset Management | Software - Application |
| Market Cap | $196M | $7.21B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $2M | $826M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $778K | $-48M |
| Gross Margin | 67.8% | 66.0% |
| Operating Margin | 35.1% | 1.4% |
| Forward P/E | 245.1x | 34.6x |
| Total Debt | $0.00 | $883M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $324K | $91M |
Quick Verdict: PLTS vs CWAN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
PLTS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- beta 0.75
- Rev growth 280.2%, EPS growth 202.4%
- 145.4% 10Y total return vs CWAN's -4.3%
CWAN is the clearest fit if your priority is value.
- Lower P/E (34.6x vs 245.1x)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 280.2% NII/revenue growth vs CWAN's 61.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (34.6x vs 245.1x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 35.2% margin vs CWAN's -5.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.75 vs CWAN's 0.80 | |
| Dividends | Tie | Neither stock pays a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +145.4% vs CWAN's +6.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 97.3% ROA vs CWAN's -1.6% |
PLTS vs CWAN — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
PLTS vs CWAN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
PLTS leads this category, winning 3 of 4 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CWAN is the larger business by revenue, generating $826M annually — 373.0x PLTS's $2M. PLTS is the more profitable business, keeping 35.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CWAN's -5.8%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $2M | $826M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | — | $94M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | — | -$48M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | — | $152M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +67.8% | +66.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +35.1% | +1.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +35.2% | -5.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -16.0% | +18.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +74.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -137.9% |
Valuation Metrics
CWAN leads this category, winning 3 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, CWAN's 70.4x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than PLTS's 239.0x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $196M | $7.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $196M | $8.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 245.10x | -173.50x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 34.60x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 239.03x | 70.39x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 88.58x | 9.85x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 3.24x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 43.85x |
Profitability & Efficiency
PLTS leads this category, winning 5 of 5 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), PLTS scores 6/9 vs CWAN's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | -2.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +97.3% | -1.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | +1.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +121.9% | +1.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 2 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.43x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$323,738 | $792M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $323,738 | $91M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $0 | $883M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 0.07x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
PLTS leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in PLTS five years ago would be worth $24,544 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $9,574 for CWAN. Over the past 12 months, PLTS leads with a +145.4% total return vs CWAN's +6.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors PLTS at 34.9% vs CWAN's 18.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | 0.0% | +0.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +145.4% | +6.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +145.4% | +65.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +145.4% | -4.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +145.4% | -4.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +34.9% | +18.3% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — PLTS and CWAN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
PLTS is the less volatile stock with a 0.75 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CWAN's 0.80 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CWAN currently trades 96.9% from its 52-week high vs PLTS's 89.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.75x | 0.80x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $19.50 | $25.07 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $4.60 | $15.74 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +89.7% | +96.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 83.7 | 69.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 789K | 4.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $24.96 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 13 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.3% |
PLTS leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). CWAN leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
PLTS vs CWAN: Frequently Asked Questions
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is PLTS or CWAN a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Platinum Analytics Cayman Limited Class A Ordinary Shares (PLTS) is the stronger pick with 280.
2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 61. 9% for Clearwater Analytics Holdings, Inc. (CWAN). Platinum Analytics Cayman Limited Class A Ordinary Shares (PLTS) offers the better valuation at 245. 1x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Clearwater Analytics Holdings, Inc. (CWAN) a "Hold" — based on 13 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 is the better long-term investment — PLTS or CWAN?
Over the past 5 years, Platinum Analytics Cayman Limited Class A Ordinary Shares (PLTS) delivered a total return of +145.
4%, compared to -4. 3% for Clearwater Analytics Holdings, Inc. (CWAN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: PLTS returned +145. 4% versus CWAN's -4. 3%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — PLTS or CWAN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Platinum Analytics Cayman Limited Class A Ordinary Shares (PLTS) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
75β versus Clearwater Analytics Holdings, Inc. 's 0. 80β — meaning CWAN is approximately 6% more volatile than PLTS relative to the S&P 500.
04Which is growing faster — PLTS or CWAN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Platinum Analytics Cayman Limited Class A Ordinary Shares (PLTS) is pulling ahead at 280.
2% versus 61. 9% for Clearwater Analytics Holdings, Inc. (CWAN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Platinum Analytics Cayman Limited Class A Ordinary Shares grew EPS 202. 4% year-over-year, compared to -108. 3% for Clearwater Analytics 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.
05Which has better profit margins — PLTS or CWAN?
Platinum Analytics Cayman Limited Class A Ordinary Shares (PLTS) is the more profitable company, earning 35.
2% net margin versus -5. 3% for Clearwater Analytics Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 35. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: PLTS leads at 35. 1% versus 3. 8% for CWAN. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — PLTS leads at 67. 8%, 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.
06Which pays a better dividend — PLTS or CWAN?
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.
07Is PLTS or CWAN better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Platinum Analytics Cayman Limited Class A Ordinary Shares (PLTS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
75), +145. 4% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (PLTS: +145. 4%, CWAN: -4. 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.
08What are the main differences between PLTS and CWAN?
These companies operate in different sectors (PLTS (Financial Services) and CWAN (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
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.