Specialty Business Services
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
SFHG vs CODA vs CLPS vs MNDO vs NTCT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Aerospace & Defense
Information Technology Services
Software - Application
Software - Infrastructure
SFHG vs CODA vs CLPS vs MNDO vs NTCT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Specialty Business Services | Aerospace & Defense | Information Technology Services | Software - Application | Software - Infrastructure |
| Market Cap | $10M | $136M | $25M | $20M | $2.82B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $41M | $28M | $299M | $19M | $861M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-3M | $4M | $-4M | $3M | $96M |
| Gross Margin | 21.8% | 66.3% | 22.8% | 51.0% | 79.2% |
| Operating Margin | -7.4% | 17.4% | -1.4% | 10.7% | 12.8% |
| Forward P/E | — | 22.8x | — | 7.6x | 16.2x |
| Total Debt | $8M | $395K | $34M | $929K | $76M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $6M | $29M | $28M | $8M | $457M |
SFHG vs CODA vs CLPS vs MNDO vs NTCT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Oct 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Samfine Creation Ho… (SFHG) | 100 | 0.9 | -99.1% |
| Coda Octopus Group,… (CODA) | 100 | 142.0 | +42.0% |
| CLPS Incorporation (CLPS) | 100 | 65.7 | -34.3% |
| MIND C.T.I. Ltd (MNDO) | 100 | 50.5 | -49.5% |
| NetScout Systems, I… (NTCT) | 100 | 185.9 | +85.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SFHG vs CODA vs CLPS vs MNDO vs NTCT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, SFHG doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
CODA is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 30.7%, EPS growth 15.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 6.1%
- 8.6% 10Y total return vs NTCT's 70.0%
- 30.7% revenue growth vs SFHG's -85.8%
- 14.8% margin vs SFHG's -7.0%
CLPS ranks third and is worth considering specifically for dividends.
- 14.7% yield, 3-year raise streak, vs MNDO's 22.0%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
MNDO 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 0.05, yield 22.0%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.05, Low D/E 4.0%, current ratio 3.83x
- Beta 0.05, yield 22.0%, current ratio 3.83x
- Lower P/E (7.6x vs 16.2x)
NTCT is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +81.3% vs SFHG's -86.3%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 30.7% revenue growth vs SFHG's -85.8% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.6x vs 16.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 14.8% margin vs SFHG's -7.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.05 vs SFHG's 1.24, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 14.7% yield, 3-year raise streak, vs MNDO's 22.0%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +81.3% vs SFHG's -86.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 8.6% ROA vs SFHG's -3.4%, ROIC 8.6% vs -6.9% |
SFHG vs CODA vs CLPS vs MNDO vs NTCT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
SFHG vs CODA vs CLPS vs MNDO vs NTCT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CODA leads in 3 of 6 categories
SFHG leads 0 • CLPS leads 0 • MNDO leads 0 • NTCT leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CODA leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NTCT is the larger business by revenue, generating $861M annually — 44.3x MNDO's $19M. CODA is the more profitable business, keeping 14.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to SFHG's -7.0%. On growth, CODA holds the edge at +28.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $41M | $28M | $299M | $19M | $861M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$2M | $6M | -$1M | $2M | $171M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$3M | $4M | -$4M | $3M | $96M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$5M | $7M | $0 | $4M | $275M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +21.8% | +66.3% | +22.8% | +51.0% | +79.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -7.4% | +17.4% | -1.4% | +10.7% | +12.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -7.0% | +14.8% | -1.3% | +13.4% | +11.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -11.5% | +24.6% | -2.3% | +20.9% | +32.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +22.3% | +28.8% | +15.3% | -6.0% | -0.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +35.7% | +3.0% | +75.8% | -23.4% | +11.9% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — CLPS and MNDO and NTCT each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 7.6x trailing earnings, MNDO trades at a 77% valuation discount to CODA's 32.7x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, MNDO's 5.5x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than CODA's 18.3x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $10M | $136M | $25M | $20M | $2.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $12M | $108M | $31M | $13M | $2.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -4.05x | 32.73x | -3.46x | 7.62x | -7.73x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 22.85x | — | — | 16.20x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 7.64x | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 18.25x | — | 5.51x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.48x | 5.14x | 0.15x | 1.04x | 3.43x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.56x | 2.34x | 0.43x | 0.89x | 1.82x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 22.60x | — | 5.09x | 13.38x |
Profitability & Efficiency
CODA leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MNDO delivers a 11.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $12 in annual profit, vs $-10 for SFHG. CODA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to SFHG's 1.16x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CODA scores 7/9 vs SFHG's 1/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -10.4% | +7.2% | -6.1% | +11.9% | +6.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -3.4% | +6.6% | -3.2% | +8.6% | +4.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -6.9% | +11.2% | -7.9% | +8.6% | -19.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -6.1% | +8.1% | -9.8% | +7.8% | -18.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 7 | 2 | 4 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.16x | 0.01x | 0.59x | 0.04x | 0.05x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $2M | -$28M | $6M | -$7M | -$381M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $6M | $29M | $28M | $8M | $457M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $8M | $394,932 | $34M | $929,000 | $76M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -7.35x | — | — | — | 55.89x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CODA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CODA five years ago would be worth $15,586 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $192 for SFHG. Over the past 12 months, NTCT leads with a +81.3% total return vs SFHG's -86.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CODA at 11.0% vs SFHG's -73.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -86.2% | +27.3% | -10.9% | -15.4% | +45.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -86.3% | +78.9% | -9.4% | -31.7% | +81.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.1% | +36.8% | +0.0% | -25.3% | +33.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.1% | +55.9% | -69.2% | -35.4% | +46.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.1% | +861.1% | -78.6% | +65.7% | +70.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -73.2% | +11.0% | +0.0% | -9.2% | +10.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MNDO and NTCT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MNDO is the less volatile stock with a 0.05 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than SFHG's 1.24 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. NTCT currently trades 98.5% from its 52-week high vs SFHG's 9.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.24x | 0.99x | 0.19x | 0.05x | 1.10x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $26.25 | $17.28 | $1.88 | $1.54 | $39.69 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.72 | $5.98 | $0.80 | $0.98 | $19.98 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +9.7% | +70.1% | +47.9% | +64.3% | +98.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 34.8 | 48.3 | 46.8 | 27.4 | 78.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 13K | 255K | 15K | 38K | 556K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — CLPS and MNDO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CODA as "Buy", NTCT as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 15.6% upside for CODA (target: $14) vs -2.8% for NTCT (target: $38). For income investors, MNDO offers the higher dividend yield at 22.05% vs CLPS's 14.69%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | — | — | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $14.00 | — | — | $38.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 1 | — | — | 21 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +14.7% | +22.0% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $0.13 | $0.22 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.6% | +0.9% |
CODA leads in 3 of 6 categories — strongest in Income & Cash Flow and Profitability & Efficiency. 3 categories are tied.
SFHG vs CODA vs CLPS vs MNDO vs NTCT: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SFHG or CODA or CLPS or MNDO or NTCT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Coda Octopus Group, Inc.
(CODA) is the stronger pick with 30. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -85. 8% for Samfine Creation Holdings Group Limited (SFHG). MIND C. T. I. Ltd (MNDO) offers the better valuation at 7. 6x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Coda Octopus Group, Inc. (CODA) a "Buy" — based on 1 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 — SFHG or CODA or CLPS or MNDO or NTCT?
On trailing P/E, MIND C.
T. I. Ltd (MNDO) is the cheapest at 7. 6x versus Coda Octopus Group, Inc. at 32. 7x. On forward P/E, NetScout Systems, Inc. is actually cheaper at 16. 2x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — SFHG or CODA or CLPS or MNDO or NTCT?
Over the past 5 years, Coda Octopus Group, Inc.
(CODA) delivered a total return of +55. 9%, compared to -98. 1% for Samfine Creation Holdings Group Limited (SFHG). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CODA returned +861. 1% versus SFHG's -98. 1%. 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 — SFHG or CODA or CLPS or MNDO or NTCT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), MIND C.
T. I. Ltd (MNDO) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 05β versus Samfine Creation Holdings Group Limited's 1. 24β — meaning SFHG is approximately 2316% more volatile than MNDO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Coda Octopus Group, Inc. (CODA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 116% for Samfine Creation Holdings Group Limited — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — SFHG or CODA or CLPS or MNDO or NTCT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Coda Octopus Group, Inc.
(CODA) is pulling ahead at 30. 7% versus -85. 8% for Samfine Creation Holdings Group Limited (SFHG). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Samfine Creation Holdings Group Limited grew EPS 80. 6% year-over-year, compared to -181. 4% for CLPS Incorporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, CODA leads at 6. 1% 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 — SFHG or CODA or CLPS or MNDO or NTCT?
Coda Octopus Group, Inc.
(CODA) is the more profitable company, earning 15. 5% net margin versus -44. 6% for NetScout Systems, Inc. — meaning it keeps 15. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CODA leads at 17. 1% versus -44. 7% for NTCT. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NTCT leads at 78. 3%, 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 SFHG or CODA or CLPS or MNDO or NTCT more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, NetScout Systems, Inc.
(NTCT) trades at 16. 2x forward P/E versus 22. 8x for Coda Octopus Group, Inc. — 6. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CODA: 15. 6% to $14. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — SFHG or CODA or CLPS or MNDO or NTCT?
In this comparison, MNDO (22.
0% yield), CLPS (14. 7% yield) pay a dividend. SFHG, CODA, NTCT do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is SFHG or CODA or CLPS or MNDO or NTCT better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, MIND C.
T. I. Ltd (MNDO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 05), 22. 0% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MNDO: +65. 7%, SFHG: -98. 1%), 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 SFHG and CODA and CLPS and MNDO and NTCT?
These companies operate in different sectors (SFHG (Industrials) and CODA (Industrials) and CLPS (Technology) and MNDO (Technology) and NTCT (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: SFHG is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CODA is a small-cap high-growth stock; CLPS is a small-cap high-growth stock; MNDO is a small-cap deep-value stock; NTCT is a small-cap quality compounder stock. CLPS, MNDO pay a dividend while SFHG, CODA, NTCT 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.