Integrated Freight & Logistics
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
PSIG vs CTRM vs TOPS vs GLBS vs ESEA
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Marine Shipping
Marine Shipping
Marine Shipping
Marine Shipping
PSIG vs CTRM vs TOPS vs GLBS vs ESEA — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Integrated Freight & Logistics | Marine Shipping | Marine Shipping | Marine Shipping | Marine Shipping |
| Market Cap | $26M | $78M | $10M | $45M | $506M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $68M | $123M | $44M | $228M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-1M | $-44M | $1M | $-2M | $137M |
| Gross Margin | 4.1% | 23.8% | 59.5% | 26.5% | 63.5% |
| Operating Margin | -6.0% | -62.2% | 36.5% | 5.4% | 61.6% |
| Forward P/E | — | 2.3x | 2.0x | — | 4.3x |
| Total Debt | $131K | $111M | $251M | $109M | $217M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $8M | $88M | $8M | $27M | $177M |
PSIG vs CTRM vs TOPS vs GLBS vs ESEA — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jul 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| PS International Gr… (PSIG) | 100 | 80.6 | -19.4% |
| Castor Maritime Inc. (CTRM) | 100 | 37.4 | -62.6% |
| Top Ships Inc. (TOPS) | 100 | 22.0 | -78.0% |
| Globus Maritime Lim… (GLBS) | 100 | 126.4 | +26.4% |
| Euroseas Ltd. (ESEA) | 100 | 240.4 | +140.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: PSIG vs CTRM vs TOPS vs GLBS vs ESEA
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
PSIG ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +126.6% vs TOPS's -61.1%
Among these 5 stocks, CTRM doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
TOPS is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 3.8%, EPS growth 108.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 15.2%
- Lower P/E (2.0x vs 4.3x)
GLBS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.50, Low D/E 62.1%, current ratio 2.74x
- 26.8% revenue growth vs PSIG's -37.7%
- Beta 0.50 vs ESEA's 1.28
ESEA carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 5 yrs, beta 1.28, yield 3.8%
- 389.1% 10Y total return vs PSIG's -92.2%
- Beta 1.28, yield 3.8%, current ratio 4.89x
- 60.1% margin vs CTRM's -65.4%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 26.8% revenue growth vs PSIG's -37.7% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (2.0x vs 4.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 60.1% margin vs CTRM's -65.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.50 vs ESEA's 1.28 | |
| Dividends | 3.8% yield, 5-year raise streak, vs CTRM's 3.2%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +126.6% vs TOPS's -61.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 19.6% ROA vs PSIG's -9.7%, ROIC 19.5% vs -159.2% |
PSIG vs CTRM vs TOPS vs GLBS vs ESEA — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
PSIG vs CTRM vs TOPS vs GLBS vs ESEA — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ESEA leads in 4 of 6 categories
TOPS leads 1 • PSIG leads 0 • CTRM leads 0 • GLBS leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ESEA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ESEA and PSIG operate at a comparable scale, with $228M and $0 in trailing revenue. ESEA is the more profitable business, keeping 60.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CTRM's -65.4%. On growth, TOPS holds the edge at +100.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $68M | $123M | $44M | $228M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$1M | -$27M | $66M | $16M | $169M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$1M | -$44M | $1M | -$2M | $137M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$784,909 | -$58M | -$63M | $2M | $64M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +4.1% | +23.8% | +59.5% | +26.5% | +63.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -6.0% | -62.2% | +36.5% | +5.4% | +61.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -5.5% | -65.4% | +1.2% | -4.0% | +60.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -2.1% | -86.1% | -50.9% | +5.2% | +28.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +10.2% | +100.0% | +54.8% | +7.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -94.1% | -3.2% | +141.9% | +65.9% |
Valuation Metrics
TOPS leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 2.0x trailing earnings, TOPS trades at a 45% valuation discount to ESEA's 3.7x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, ESEA's 3.4x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than GLBS's 7.6x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $26M | $78M | $10M | $45M | $506M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $18M | $102M | $254M | $128M | $546M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -5.38x | 2.32x | 2.02x | -26.04x | 3.67x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | — | 4.32x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 5.86x | 4.97x | 7.55x | 3.44x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.30x | 1.18x | 0.12x | 1.02x | 2.22x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.40x | 0.13x | 0.07x | 0.26x | 1.08x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 0.59x | — | 7.90x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ESEA leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ESEA delivers a 29.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $30 in annual profit, vs $-19 for PSIG. PSIG carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to TOPS's 1.74x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ESEA scores 7/9 vs PSIG's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -19.4% | -8.0% | +0.8% | -1.0% | +29.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -9.7% | -6.3% | +0.3% | -0.6% | +19.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -159.2% | +0.2% | +5.3% | +0.7% | +19.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -44.4% | +0.2% | +6.9% | +0.9% | +21.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.01x | 0.18x | 1.74x | 0.62x | 0.47x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$8M | $23M | $244M | $83M | $40M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $8M | $88M | $8M | $27M | $177M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $131,325 | $111M | $251M | $109M | $217M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | -4.80x | 1.91x | 0.76x | 9.47x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
ESEA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ESEA five years ago would be worth $54,420 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $56 for TOPS. Over the past 12 months, PSIG leads with a +126.6% total return vs TOPS's -61.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ESEA at 73.8% vs PSIG's -57.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +54.3% | -4.7% | -53.6% | +32.5% | +34.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +126.6% | -4.7% | -61.1% | +101.8% | +115.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -92.2% | -69.4% | -75.2% | +126.8% | +425.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -92.2% | -88.4% | -99.4% | -50.5% | +444.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -92.2% | -99.0% | -100.0% | -99.9% | +389.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -57.3% | -32.6% | -37.2% | +31.4% | +73.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — PSIG and GLBS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
GLBS is the less volatile stock with a 0.50 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ESEA's 1.28 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. PSIG currently trades 98.2% from its 52-week high vs TOPS's 19.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.75x | 1.22x | 0.54x | 0.50x | 1.28x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $7.29 | $2.65 | $11.47 | $2.44 | $74.70 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $2.14 | $1.66 | $2.11 | $0.99 | $33.76 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +98.2% | +76.1% | +19.2% | +90.2% | +96.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 55.2 | 55.5 | 24.7 | 53.2 | 62.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 287K | 52K | 210K | 87K | 86K |
Analyst Outlook
ESEA leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
For income investors, ESEA offers the higher dividend yield at 3.78% vs CTRM's 3.19%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | — | — | — | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | — | — | — | — |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | — | — | — | 5 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +3.2% | — | — | +3.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.06 | — | — | $2.73 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +100.0% | 0.0% | +0.4% |
ESEA leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). TOPS leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
PSIG vs CTRM vs TOPS vs GLBS vs ESEA: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is PSIG or CTRM or TOPS or GLBS or ESEA a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Globus Maritime Limited (GLBS) is the stronger pick with 26.
8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -37. 7% for PS International Group Ltd. (PSIG). Top Ships Inc. (TOPS) offers the better valuation at 2. 0x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Euroseas Ltd. (ESEA) 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.
02Which has the better valuation — PSIG or CTRM or TOPS or GLBS or ESEA?
On trailing P/E, Top Ships Inc.
(TOPS) is the cheapest at 2. 0x versus Euroseas Ltd. at 3. 7x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — PSIG or CTRM or TOPS or GLBS or ESEA?
Over the past 5 years, Euroseas Ltd.
(ESEA) delivered a total return of +444. 2%, compared to -99. 4% for Top Ships Inc. (TOPS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ESEA returned +389. 1% versus TOPS's -100. 0%. 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 — PSIG or CTRM or TOPS or GLBS or ESEA?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Globus Maritime Limited (GLBS) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
50β versus Euroseas Ltd. 's 1. 28β — meaning ESEA is approximately 154% more volatile than GLBS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, PS International Group Ltd. (PSIG) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 174% for Top Ships Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — PSIG or CTRM or TOPS or GLBS or ESEA?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Globus Maritime Limited (GLBS) is pulling ahead at 26.
8% versus -37. 7% for PS International Group Ltd. (PSIG). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Top Ships Inc. grew EPS 108. 8% year-over-year, compared to -638. 9% for PS International Group Ltd.. Over a 3-year CAGR, TOPS leads at 15. 2% 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 — PSIG or CTRM or TOPS or GLBS or ESEA?
Euroseas Ltd.
(ESEA) is the more profitable company, earning 60. 1% net margin versus -5. 5% for PS International Group Ltd. — meaning it keeps 60. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ESEA leads at 57. 0% versus -6. 0% for PSIG. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ESEA leads at 63. 5%, 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.
07Which pays a better dividend — PSIG or CTRM or TOPS or GLBS or ESEA?
In this comparison, ESEA (3.
8% yield), CTRM (3. 2% yield) pay a dividend. PSIG, TOPS, GLBS do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
08Is PSIG or CTRM or TOPS or GLBS or ESEA better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Euroseas Ltd.
(ESEA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 28), 3. 8% yield, +389. 1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ESEA: +389. 1%, PSIG: -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.
09What are the main differences between PSIG and CTRM and TOPS and GLBS and ESEA?
Both stocks operate in the Industrials sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: PSIG is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CTRM is a small-cap deep-value stock; TOPS is a small-cap deep-value stock; GLBS is a small-cap high-growth stock; ESEA is a small-cap deep-value stock. CTRM, ESEA pay a dividend while PSIG, TOPS, GLBS 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.