Specialty Business Services
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
RHLD vs TPVG vs CSWC vs HRZN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Asset Management
Asset Management
Asset Management
RHLD vs TPVG vs CSWC vs HRZN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Specialty Business Services | Asset Management | Asset Management | Asset Management |
| Market Cap | $891M | $243M | $1.43B | $199M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $766M | $97M | $164M | $40M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-121M | $-12M | $103M | $28M |
| Gross Margin | 47.2% | 83.5% | 66.5% | 18.0% |
| Operating Margin | 14.6% | 77.9% | 48.5% | -4.0% |
| Forward P/E | — | 6.5x | 10.1x | 6.1x |
| Total Debt | $195M | $469M | $956M | $473M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $161M | $20M | $43M | $106M |
RHLD vs TPVG vs CSWC vs HRZN — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Feb 25 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Resolute Holdings M… (RHLD) | 100 | 230.5 | +130.5% |
| TriplePoint Venture… (TPVG) | 100 | 74.0 | -26.0% |
| Capital Southwest C… (CSWC) | 100 | 103.0 | +3.0% |
| Horizon Technology … (HRZN) | 100 | 45.8 | -54.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: RHLD vs TPVG vs CSWC vs HRZN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
RHLD is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +288.2% vs HRZN's -23.2%
TPVG is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and bank quality is your priority.
- Rev growth 36.6%, EPS growth 48.8%
- NIM 7.4% vs CSWC's 7.0%
- 36.6% NII/revenue growth vs CSWC's 7.7%
- 50.6% margin vs RHLD's -15.9%
CSWC is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 234.2% 10Y total return vs RHLD's 200.7%
- 4.8% ROA vs RHLD's -6.8%, ROIC 3.5% vs 96.1%
HRZN carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.70, yield 27.8%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.70, current ratio 1.24x
- PEG 0.26 vs TPVG's 6.41
- Beta 0.70, yield 27.8%, current ratio 1.24x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 36.6% NII/revenue growth vs CSWC's 7.7% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (6.1x vs 10.1x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 50.6% margin vs RHLD's -15.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.70 vs RHLD's 1.89, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 27.8% yield, vs CSWC's 10.2%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +288.2% vs HRZN's -23.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 4.8% ROA vs RHLD's -6.8%, ROIC 3.5% vs 96.1% |
RHLD vs TPVG vs CSWC vs HRZN — 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.
RHLD vs TPVG vs CSWC vs HRZN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
RHLD leads in 2 of 6 categories
TPVG leads 1 • HRZN leads 1 • CSWC leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TPVG leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
RHLD is the larger business by revenue, generating $766M annually — 19.1x HRZN's $40M. TPVG is the more profitable business, keeping 50.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to RHLD's -15.9%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $766M | $97M | $164M | $40M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $119M | -$22M | $142M | $19M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$121M | -$12M | $103M | $28M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $46M | $35M | -$69M | $67M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +47.2% | +83.5% | +66.5% | +18.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +14.6% | +77.9% | +48.5% | -4.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -15.9% | +50.6% | +43.1% | -6.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +6.1% | -58.7% | -132.6% | +141.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +2.9% | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +19.4% | -2.3% | +113.3% | -29.6% |
Valuation Metrics
HRZN leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 4.3x trailing earnings, HRZN trades at a 74% valuation discount to CSWC's 16.3x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), HRZN offers better value at 0.18x vs TPVG's 4.84x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $891M | $243M | $1.4B | $199M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $925M | $691M | $2.3B | $567M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -156.41x | 4.91x | 16.32x | 4.30x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 6.50x | 10.06x | 6.10x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 4.84x | — | 0.18x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 6.06x | 9.13x | 27.43x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.93x | 2.50x | 8.71x | 4.97x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 11.83x | 0.68x | 1.39x | 0.60x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 4.71x | — | — | 3.51x |
Profitability & Efficiency
RHLD leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CSWC delivers a 10.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $10 in annual profit, vs $-15 for RHLD. CSWC carries lower financial leverage with a 1.08x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to RHLD's 2.51x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), RHLD scores 6/9 vs CSWC's 1/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -15.2% | -3.4% | +10.3% | +9.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -6.8% | -1.5% | +4.8% | +3.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +96.1% | +7.2% | +3.5% | -0.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +56.0% | +9.4% | +4.6% | -0.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 5 | 1 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 2.51x | 1.33x | 1.08x | 1.49x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $34M | $449M | $913M | $368M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $161M | $20M | $43M | $106M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $195M | $469M | $956M | $473M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 5.99x | -1.02x | 2.91x | 0.60x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
RHLD leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in RHLD five years ago would be worth $30,070 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,724 for HRZN. Over the past 12 months, RHLD leads with a +288.2% total return vs HRZN's -23.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors RHLD at 44.3% vs HRZN's -10.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -42.1% | -6.3% | +11.4% | -26.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +288.2% | +19.3% | +34.0% | -23.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +200.7% | -3.4% | +75.8% | -27.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +200.7% | -13.5% | +51.4% | -32.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +200.7% | +93.3% | +234.2% | +52.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +44.3% | -1.2% | +20.7% | -10.3% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CSWC and HRZN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
HRZN is the less volatile stock with a 0.70 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than RHLD's 1.89 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CSWC currently trades 98.2% from its 52-week high vs RHLD's 45.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.89x | 0.83x | 0.84x | 0.70x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $236.19 | $7.53 | $24.43 | $8.46 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $26.57 | $4.48 | $19.37 | $3.80 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +45.7% | +79.5% | +98.2% | +53.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 43.5 | 58.3 | 63.7 | 58.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 215K | 504K | 664K | 1.2M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — CSWC and HRZN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: TPVG as "Hold", CSWC as "Buy", HRZN as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 49.4% upside for TPVG (target: $9) vs -6.2% for CSWC (target: $23). For income investors, HRZN offers the higher dividend yield at 27.80% vs CSWC's 10.20%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $8.95 | $22.50 | $6.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 12 | 10 | 22 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +17.1% | +10.2% | +27.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $1.02 | $2.45 | $1.25 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.5% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
RHLD leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). TPVG leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 2 tied.
RHLD vs TPVG vs CSWC vs HRZN: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is RHLD or TPVG or CSWC or HRZN a better buy right now?
For growth investors, TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp.
(TPVG) is the stronger pick with 36. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 7. 7% for Capital Southwest Corporation (CSWC). Horizon Technology Finance Corporation (HRZN) offers the better valuation at 4. 3x trailing P/E (6. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Capital Southwest Corporation (CSWC) a "Buy" — based on 10 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 — RHLD or TPVG or CSWC or HRZN?
On trailing P/E, Horizon Technology Finance Corporation (HRZN) is the cheapest at 4.
3x versus Capital Southwest Corporation at 16. 3x. On forward P/E, Horizon Technology Finance Corporation is actually cheaper at 6. 1x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Horizon Technology Finance Corporation wins at 0. 26x versus TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp. 's 6. 41x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — RHLD or TPVG or CSWC or HRZN?
Over the past 5 years, Resolute Holdings Management, Inc.
(RHLD) delivered a total return of +200. 7%, compared to -32. 8% for Horizon Technology Finance Corporation (HRZN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CSWC returned +234. 2% versus HRZN's +52. 9%. 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 — RHLD or TPVG or CSWC or HRZN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Horizon Technology Finance Corporation (HRZN) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
70β versus Resolute Holdings Management, Inc. 's 1. 89β — meaning RHLD is approximately 170% more volatile than HRZN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Capital Southwest Corporation (CSWC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 108% versus 3% for Resolute Holdings Management, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — RHLD or TPVG or CSWC or HRZN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp.
(TPVG) is pulling ahead at 36. 6% versus 7. 7% for Capital Southwest Corporation (CSWC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Horizon Technology Finance Corporation grew EPS 756. 3% year-over-year, compared to -121. 0% for Resolute Holdings Management, 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 — RHLD or TPVG or CSWC or HRZN?
TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp.
(TPVG) is the more profitable company, earning 50. 6% net margin versus -6. 6% for Horizon Technology Finance Corporation — meaning it keeps 50. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: TPVG leads at 77. 9% versus -4. 0% for HRZN. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — TPVG leads at 83. 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.
07Is RHLD or TPVG or CSWC or HRZN more undervalued right now?
The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.
By this metric, Horizon Technology Finance Corporation (HRZN) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 26x versus TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp. 's 6. 41x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Horizon Technology Finance Corporation (HRZN) trades at 6. 1x forward P/E versus 10. 1x for Capital Southwest Corporation — 4. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for TPVG: 49. 4% to $8. 95.
08Which pays a better dividend — RHLD or TPVG or CSWC or HRZN?
In this comparison, HRZN (27.
8% yield), TPVG (17. 1% yield), CSWC (10. 2% yield) pay a dividend. RHLD does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is RHLD or TPVG or CSWC or HRZN better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Capital Southwest Corporation (CSWC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
84), 10. 2% yield, +234. 2% 10Y return). Resolute Holdings Management, Inc. (RHLD) carries a higher beta of 1. 89 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (CSWC: +234. 2%, RHLD: +200. 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 RHLD and TPVG and CSWC and HRZN?
These companies operate in different sectors (RHLD (Industrials) and TPVG (Financial Services) and CSWC (Financial Services) and HRZN (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: RHLD is a small-cap quality compounder stock; TPVG is a small-cap high-growth stock; CSWC is a small-cap deep-value stock; HRZN is a small-cap high-growth stock. TPVG, CSWC, HRZN pay a dividend while RHLD 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.
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: Financial Services
- Market Cap > $100B
- Revenue Growth > 8%
- Dividend Yield > 11.1%
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.