Advertising Agencies
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
QNST vs TREE vs RAMP vs MTCH vs EVER
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Conglomerates
Software - Infrastructure
Internet Content & Information
Internet Content & Information
QNST vs TREE vs RAMP vs MTCH vs EVER — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Advertising Agencies | Financial - Conglomerates | Software - Infrastructure | Internet Content & Information | Internet Content & Information |
| Market Cap | $761M | $552M | $1.90B | $8.34B | $729M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.18B | $1.12B | $796M | $3.52B | $717M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-30M | $181M | $69M | $663M | $110M |
| Gross Margin | 10.5% | 94.3% | 70.4% | 73.8% | 97.5% |
| Operating Margin | 1.7% | 7.3% | 7.1% | 26.6% | 11.4% |
| Forward P/E | 10.5x | 7.1x | 13.1x | 13.5x | 10.4x |
| Total Debt | $10M | $435M | $36M | $3.97B | $3M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $101M | $81M | $413M | $1.03B | $95M |
QNST vs TREE vs RAMP vs MTCH vs EVER — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| QuinStreet, Inc. (QNST) | 100 | 131.8 | +31.8% |
| LendingTree, Inc. (TREE) | 100 | 15.3 | -84.7% |
| LiveRamp Holdings, … (RAMP) | 100 | 59.8 | -40.2% |
| Match Group, Inc. (MTCH) | 100 | 40.2 | -59.8% |
| EverQuote, Inc. (EVER) | 100 | 38.2 | -61.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: QNST vs TREE vs RAMP vs MTCH vs EVER
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
QNST is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 78.3%, EPS growth 114.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 23.4%
- 288.4% 10Y total return vs MTCH's 195.5%
- 78.3% revenue growth vs MTCH's 0.2%
TREE ranks third and is worth considering specifically for value.
- Lower P/E (7.1x vs 13.5x)
RAMP is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.97, Low D/E 3.8%, current ratio 2.65x
- Beta 0.97, current ratio 2.65x
- Beta 0.97 vs TREE's 1.55, lower leverage
MTCH carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 1.04, yield 2.0%
- 18.8% margin vs QNST's -2.6%
- 2.0% yield; 1-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
- +20.5% vs QNST's -26.9%
EVER is the clearest fit if your priority is efficiency.
- 38.3% ROA vs QNST's -5.9%, ROIC 54.8% vs 2.8%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 78.3% revenue growth vs MTCH's 0.2% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.1x vs 13.5x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 18.8% margin vs QNST's -2.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.97 vs TREE's 1.55, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.0% yield; 1-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +20.5% vs QNST's -26.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 38.3% ROA vs QNST's -5.9%, ROIC 54.8% vs 2.8% |
QNST vs TREE vs RAMP vs MTCH vs EVER — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
QNST vs TREE vs RAMP vs MTCH vs EVER — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MTCH leads in 2 of 6 categories
TREE leads 1 • EVER leads 1 • QNST leads 0 • RAMP leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MTCH leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MTCH is the larger business by revenue, generating $3.5B annually — 4.9x EVER's $717M. MTCH is the more profitable business, keeping 18.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to QNST's -2.6%. On growth, QNST holds the edge at +28.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.2B | $1.1B | $796M | $3.5B | $717M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $26M | $120M | $71M | $1.0B | $85M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$30M | $181M | $69M | $663M | $110M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $99M | $73M | $169M | $1.0B | $99M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +10.5% | +94.3% | +70.4% | +73.8% | +97.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +1.7% | +7.3% | +7.1% | +26.6% | +11.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -2.6% | +13.5% | +8.6% | +18.8% | +15.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +8.4% | +5.4% | +21.3% | +29.0% | +13.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +28.3% | — | +8.6% | +3.9% | +14.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +59.4% | +2.3% | +2.6% | +45.5% | +142.9% |
Valuation Metrics
TREE leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 3.7x trailing earnings, TREE trades at a 98% valuation discount to QNST's 165.6x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, TREE's 8.7x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than RAMP's 67.5x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $761M | $552M | $1.9B | $8.3B | $729M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $671M | $906M | $1.5B | $11.3B | $636M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 165.55x | 3.69x | -2491.74x | 15.05x | 7.83x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 10.47x | 7.11x | 13.14x | 13.49x | 10.40x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 0.51x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 21.84x | 8.73x | 67.50x | 11.53x | 9.04x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.70x | 0.49x | 2.55x | 2.39x | 1.05x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 3.19x | 1.95x | 2.14x | — | 3.27x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 9.18x | 9.09x | 12.31x | 8.14x | 8.07x |
Profitability & Efficiency
EVER 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 $-11 for QNST. EVER carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to TREE's 1.52x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), QNST scores 8/9 vs RAMP's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -11.1% | +86.0% | +7.1% | — | +53.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -5.9% | +21.8% | +5.7% | +15.3% | +38.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +2.8% | +9.0% | +0.7% | +23.7% | +54.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +2.4% | +13.2% | +0.5% | +23.7% | +35.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 6 | 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.04x | 1.52x | 0.04x | — | 0.01x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$91M | $354M | -$377M | $2.9B | -$93M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $101M | $81M | $413M | $1.0B | $95M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $10M | $435M | $36M | $4.0B | $3M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 4.64x | 4.45x | 31.98x | 6.17x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — QNST and MTCH and EVER each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in QNST five years ago would be worth $7,160 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,126 for TREE. Over the past 12 months, MTCH leads with a +20.5% total return vs QNST's -26.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors EVER at 45.8% vs MTCH's 4.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -5.1% | -22.7% | +10.0% | +14.1% | -19.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -26.9% | +6.1% | +11.8% | +20.5% | -10.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +81.0% | +112.0% | +26.8% | +13.9% | +209.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -28.4% | -78.7% | -39.2% | -74.7% | -35.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +288.4% | -45.7% | +31.6% | +195.5% | +16.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +21.9% | +28.5% | +8.2% | +4.4% | +45.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — RAMP and MTCH each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
RAMP is the less volatile stock with a 0.97 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than TREE's 1.55 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MTCH currently trades 91.4% from its 52-week high vs TREE's 51.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.23x | 1.55x | 0.97x | 1.04x | 1.25x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $18.41 | $77.35 | $35.20 | $39.20 | $28.73 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $10.29 | $32.65 | $21.71 | $26.80 | $13.88 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +72.6% | +51.5% | +85.7% | +91.4% | +71.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 53.3 | 39.3 | 56.1 | 68.8 | 62.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 673K | 326K | 651K | 4.4M | 952K |
Analyst Outlook
MTCH leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: QNST as "Buy", TREE as "Buy", RAMP as "Buy", MTCH as "Buy", EVER as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 73.2% upside for TREE (target: $69) vs 0.5% for MTCH (target: $36). MTCH is the only dividend payer here at 1.98% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $15.00 | $69.00 | $44.00 | $36.00 | $22.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 13 | 23 | 12 | 32 | 13 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +2.0% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 0 | 1 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $0.71 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +5.3% | +9.5% | +2.9% |
MTCH leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Analyst Outlook). TREE leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
QNST vs TREE vs RAMP vs MTCH vs EVER: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is QNST or TREE or RAMP or MTCH or EVER a better buy right now?
For growth investors, QuinStreet, Inc.
(QNST) is the stronger pick with 78. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 0. 2% for Match Group, Inc. (MTCH). 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 QuinStreet, Inc. (QNST) a "Buy" — 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 has the better valuation — QNST or TREE or RAMP or MTCH or EVER?
On trailing P/E, LendingTree, Inc.
(TREE) is the cheapest at 3. 7x versus QuinStreet, Inc. at 165. 6x. On forward P/E, LendingTree, Inc. is actually cheaper at 7. 1x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — QNST or TREE or RAMP or MTCH or EVER?
Over the past 5 years, QuinStreet, Inc.
(QNST) delivered a total return of -28. 4%, compared to -78. 7% for LendingTree, Inc. (TREE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: QNST returned +288. 4% versus TREE's -45. 7%. 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 — QNST or TREE or RAMP or MTCH or EVER?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), LiveRamp Holdings, Inc.
(RAMP) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 97β versus LendingTree, Inc. 's 1. 55β — meaning TREE is approximately 60% more volatile than RAMP relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, EverQuote, Inc. (EVER) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 152% for LendingTree, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — QNST or TREE or RAMP or MTCH or EVER?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), QuinStreet, Inc.
(QNST) is pulling ahead at 78. 3% versus 0. 2% for Match Group, Inc. (MTCH). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: LendingTree, Inc. grew EPS 443. 3% year-over-year, compared to -107. 1% for LiveRamp Holdings, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, QNST leads at 23. 4% 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 — QNST or TREE or RAMP or MTCH or EVER?
Match Group, Inc.
(MTCH) is the more profitable company, earning 17. 6% net margin versus -0. 1% for LiveRamp Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 17. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MTCH leads at 25. 0% versus 0. 6% for QNST. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — EVER leads at 97. 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.
07Is QNST or TREE or RAMP or MTCH or EVER more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, LendingTree, Inc.
(TREE) trades at 7. 1x forward P/E versus 13. 5x for Match Group, Inc. — 6. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for TREE: 73. 2% to $69. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — QNST or TREE or RAMP or MTCH or EVER?
In this comparison, MTCH (2.
0% yield) pays a dividend. QNST, TREE, RAMP, EVER do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is QNST or TREE or RAMP or MTCH or EVER better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Match Group, Inc.
(MTCH) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 04), 2. 0% yield, +195. 5% 10Y return). LendingTree, Inc. (TREE) carries a higher beta of 1. 55 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (MTCH: +195. 5%, TREE: -45. 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 QNST and TREE and RAMP and MTCH and EVER?
These companies operate in different sectors (QNST (Communication Services) and TREE (Financial Services) and RAMP (Technology) and MTCH (Communication Services) and EVER (Communication Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: QNST is a small-cap high-growth stock; TREE is a small-cap high-growth stock; RAMP is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MTCH is a small-cap deep-value stock; EVER is a small-cap high-growth stock. MTCH pays a dividend while QNST, TREE, RAMP, EVER 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.
- Sector: Communication Services
- Market Cap > $100B
- Net Margin > 11%
- Dividend Yield > 0.7%
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.