Oil & Gas Exploration & Production
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
SD vs TPVG vs WTI vs HRZN vs HTGC
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Asset Management
Oil & Gas Exploration & Production
Asset Management
Asset Management
SD vs TPVG vs WTI vs HRZN vs HTGC — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Oil & Gas Exploration & Production | Asset Management | Oil & Gas Exploration & Production | Asset Management | Asset Management |
| Market Cap | $552M | $243M | $568M | $199M | $3.07B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $164M | $97M | $522M | $40M | $547M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $76M | $-12M | $-142M | $28M | $289M |
| Gross Margin | 44.9% | 83.5% | 2.9% | 18.0% | 87.2% |
| Operating Margin | 38.9% | 77.9% | -5.7% | -4.0% | 66.7% |
| Forward P/E | 9.7x | 6.5x | — | 6.1x | 8.4x |
| Total Debt | $0.00 | $469M | $351M | $473M | $2.30B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $111M | $20M | $141M | $106M | $57M |
SD vs TPVG vs WTI vs HRZN vs HTGC — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| SandRidge Energy, I… (SD) | 100 | 948.1 | +848.1% |
| TriplePoint Venture… (TPVG) | 100 | 59.8 | -40.2% |
| W&T Offshore, Inc. (WTI) | 100 | 146.4 | +46.4% |
| Horizon Technology … (HRZN) | 100 | 41.4 | -58.6% |
| Hercules Capital, I… (HTGC) | 100 | 147.2 | +47.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SD vs TPVG vs WTI vs HRZN vs HTGC
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
SD ranks third and is worth considering specifically for defensive.
- Beta 0.11, yield 2.9%, current ratio 2.17x
- 12.0% ROA vs WTI's -14.6%, ROIC 10.7% vs -32.5%
TPVG is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 36.6%, EPS growth 48.8%
- 36.6% NII/revenue growth vs WTI's -4.5%
WTI has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 0.01, yield 1.1%
- Beta 0.01 vs TPVG's 0.83
- +208.8% vs HRZN's -23.2%
HRZN is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if valuation efficiency is your priority.
- PEG 0.26 vs TPVG's 6.41
- Lower P/E (6.1x vs 8.4x)
- 27.8% yield, vs WTI's 1.1%
HTGC is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 171.6% 10Y total return vs TPVG's 93.3%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.69, current ratio 1.44x
- NIM 9.1% vs HRZN's 7.1%
- 62.1% margin vs WTI's -27.2%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 36.6% NII/revenue growth vs WTI's -4.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (6.1x vs 8.4x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 62.1% margin vs WTI's -27.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.01 vs TPVG's 0.83 | |
| Dividends | 27.8% yield, vs WTI's 1.1% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +208.8% vs HRZN's -23.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 12.0% ROA vs WTI's -14.6%, ROIC 10.7% vs -32.5% |
SD vs TPVG vs WTI vs HRZN vs HTGC — 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.
SD vs TPVG vs WTI vs HRZN vs HTGC — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
HRZN leads in 1 of 6 categories
SD leads 1 • HTGC leads 1 • WTI leads 1 • TPVG leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — SD and HTGC each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
HTGC is the larger business by revenue, generating $547M annually — 13.7x HRZN's $40M. HTGC is the more profitable business, keeping 62.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to WTI's -27.2%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $164M | $97M | $522M | $40M | $547M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $108M | -$22M | $89M | $19M | $381M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $76M | -$12M | -$142M | $28M | $289M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $45M | $35M | $58M | $67M | -$352M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +44.9% | +83.5% | +2.9% | +18.0% | +87.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +38.9% | +77.9% | -5.7% | -4.0% | +66.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +46.4% | +50.6% | -27.2% | -6.6% | +62.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +27.2% | -58.7% | +11.1% | +141.5% | -77.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +16.8% | — | +15.5% | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +42.9% | -2.3% | +28.6% | -29.6% | -20.7% |
Valuation Metrics
HRZN leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 4.3x trailing earnings, HRZN trades at a 52% valuation discount to HTGC's 8.9x 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 | $552M | $243M | $568M | $199M | $3.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $441M | $691M | $779M | $567M | $5.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 7.88x | 4.91x | -3.78x | 4.30x | 8.86x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 9.66x | 6.50x | — | 6.10x | 8.41x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 4.84x | — | 0.18x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 4.54x | 9.13x | 8.03x | — | 14.54x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 3.53x | 2.50x | 1.13x | 4.97x | 5.61x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.08x | 0.68x | — | 0.60x | 1.44x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 17.00x | — | 20.47x | 3.51x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
SD leads this category, winning 8 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
SD delivers a 15.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $15 in annual profit, vs $-3 for TPVG. HTGC carries lower financial leverage with a 1.04x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to HRZN's 1.49x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), SD scores 8/9 vs WTI's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +15.1% | -3.4% | — | +9.0% | +13.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +12.0% | -1.5% | -14.6% | +3.6% | +6.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +10.7% | +7.2% | -32.5% | -0.2% | +6.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +9.9% | +9.4% | -6.7% | -0.2% | +8.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 1.33x | — | 1.49x | 1.04x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$111M | $449M | $210M | $368M | $2.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $111M | $20M | $141M | $106M | $57M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $0 | $469M | $351M | $473M | $2.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 80.91x | -1.02x | -1.10x | 0.60x | 4.34x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
HTGC leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in SD five years ago would be worth $43,778 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,724 for HRZN. Over the past 12 months, WTI leads with a +208.8% total return vs HRZN's -23.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors HTGC at 17.9% vs HRZN's -10.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +2.2% | -6.3% | +137.9% | -26.7% | -10.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +64.5% | +19.3% | +208.8% | -23.2% | +6.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +42.5% | -3.4% | -9.3% | -27.7% | +63.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +337.8% | -13.5% | +9.5% | -32.8% | +46.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +1.0% | +93.3% | +73.5% | +52.9% | +171.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +12.5% | -1.2% | -3.2% | -10.3% | +17.9% |
Risk & Volatility
WTI leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
WTI is the less volatile stock with a 0.01 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than TPVG's 0.83 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. WTI currently trades 85.1% from its 52-week high vs HRZN's 53.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.11x | 0.83x | 0.01x | 0.70x | 0.69x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $18.45 | $7.53 | $4.49 | $8.46 | $19.67 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $9.11 | $4.48 | $1.15 | $3.80 | $13.70 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +81.2% | +79.5% | +85.1% | +53.3% | +83.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 38.4 | 58.3 | 54.0 | 58.5 | 64.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 395K | 504K | 9.6M | 1.2M | 2.5M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — WTI and HRZN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: SD as "Hold", TPVG as "Hold", WTI as "Hold", HRZN as "Hold", HTGC as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 49.4% upside for TPVG (target: $9) vs 15.4% for HTGC (target: $19). For income investors, HRZN offers the higher dividend yield at 27.80% vs WTI's 1.06%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $8.95 | — | $6.50 | $18.92 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 24 | 12 | 15 | 22 | 31 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.9% | +17.1% | +1.1% | +27.8% | +8.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.43 | $1.02 | $0.04 | $1.25 | $1.42 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.2% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.2% |
HRZN leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). SD leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 2 tied.
SD vs TPVG vs WTI vs HRZN vs HTGC: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SD or TPVG or WTI or HRZN or HTGC 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 -4. 5% for W&T Offshore, Inc. (WTI). 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 Hercules Capital, Inc. (HTGC) a "Buy" — based on 31 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 — SD or TPVG or WTI or HRZN or HTGC?
On trailing P/E, Horizon Technology Finance Corporation (HRZN) is the cheapest at 4.
3x versus Hercules Capital, Inc. at 8. 9x. 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 — SD or TPVG or WTI or HRZN or HTGC?
Over the past 5 years, SandRidge Energy, Inc.
(SD) delivered a total return of +337. 8%, compared to -32. 8% for Horizon Technology Finance Corporation (HRZN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: HTGC returned +171. 6% versus SD's +1. 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 — SD or TPVG or WTI or HRZN or HTGC?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), W&T Offshore, Inc.
(WTI) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 01β versus TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp. 's 0. 83β — meaning TPVG is approximately 7394% more volatile than WTI relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Hercules Capital, Inc. (HTGC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 104% versus 149% for Horizon Technology Finance Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — SD or TPVG or WTI or HRZN or HTGC?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp.
(TPVG) is pulling ahead at 36. 6% versus -4. 5% for W&T Offshore, Inc. (WTI). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Horizon Technology Finance Corporation grew EPS 756. 3% year-over-year, compared to -71. 2% for W&T Offshore, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, SD leads at -15. 0% 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 — SD or TPVG or WTI or HRZN or HTGC?
Hercules Capital, Inc.
(HTGC) is the more profitable company, earning 62. 1% net margin versus -29. 9% for W&T Offshore, Inc. — meaning it keeps 62. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: TPVG leads at 77. 9% versus -10. 5% for WTI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — HTGC leads at 87. 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 SD or TPVG or WTI or HRZN or HTGC 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 9. 7x for SandRidge Energy, Inc. — 3. 6x 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 — SD or TPVG or WTI or HRZN or HTGC?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Horizon Technology Finance Corporation (HRZN) offers the highest yield at 27. 8%, versus 1. 1% for W&T Offshore, Inc. (WTI).
09Is SD or TPVG or WTI or HRZN or HTGC better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, W&T Offshore, Inc.
(WTI) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 01), 1. 1% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (WTI: +73. 5%, TPVG: +93. 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.
10What are the main differences between SD and TPVG and WTI and HRZN and HTGC?
These companies operate in different sectors (SD (Energy) and TPVG (Financial Services) and WTI (Energy) and HRZN (Financial Services) and HTGC (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: SD is a small-cap high-growth stock; TPVG is a small-cap high-growth stock; WTI is a small-cap quality compounder stock; HRZN is a small-cap high-growth stock; HTGC is a small-cap high-growth stock. 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.