Shell Companies
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
SIMA vs GS vs MS vs C vs JPM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Capital Markets
Financial - Capital Markets
Banks - Diversified
Banks - Diversified
SIMA vs GS vs MS vs C vs JPM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Shell Companies | Financial - Capital Markets | Financial - Capital Markets | Banks - Diversified | Banks - Diversified |
| Market Cap | $251M | $290.92B | $307.14B | $219.41B | $814.69B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $126.85B | $103.14B | $170.71B | $270.79B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $9M | $16.67B | $16.18B | $14.69B | $58.03B |
| Gross Margin | — | 41.1% | 55.6% | 41.7% | 58.6% |
| Operating Margin | — | 14.5% | 17.1% | 10.0% | 27.7% |
| Forward P/E | 72.7x | 15.8x | 16.2x | 11.6x | 13.6x |
| Total Debt | $0.00 | $616.93B | $360.49B | $590.56B | $751.15B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $697K | $182.09B | $75.74B | $276.53B | $469.32B |
SIMA vs GS vs MS vs C vs JPM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Aug 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| SIM Acquisition Cor… (SIMA) | 100 | 109.4 | +9.4% |
| The Goldman Sachs G… (GS) | 100 | 183.5 | +83.5% |
| Morgan Stanley (MS) | 100 | 186.3 | +86.3% |
| Citigroup Inc. (C) | 100 | 200.4 | +100.4% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 134.4 | +34.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SIMA vs GS vs MS vs C vs JPM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
SIMA lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
GS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 17.0%, EPS growth 77.3%
- 17.0% NII/revenue growth vs C's 9.9%
- Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs MS's 0.4% (lower = leaner)
- Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs MS's 0.4%
MS is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and defensive.
- 7.4% 10Y total return vs GS's 5.4%
- Beta 1.36, yield 2.0%, current ratio 0.66x
C is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if value and dividends is your priority.
- Lower P/E (11.6x vs 16.2x)
- 2.2% yield, 3-year raise streak, vs JPM's 1.7%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
- +78.6% vs SIMA's +6.2%
JPM ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 14 yrs, beta 1.00, yield 1.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.00, current ratio 0.65x
- PEG 1.04 vs MS's 1.82
- NIM 2.3% vs GS's 0.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 17.0% NII/revenue growth vs C's 9.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (11.6x vs 16.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs MS's 0.4% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.00 vs GS's 1.47, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.2% yield, 3-year raise streak, vs JPM's 1.7%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +78.6% vs SIMA's +6.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.3% vs MS's 0.4% |
SIMA vs GS vs MS vs C vs JPM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
SIMA vs GS vs MS vs C vs JPM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
JPM leads in 2 of 6 categories
GS leads 1 • SIMA leads 0 • MS leads 0 • C leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM and SIMA operate at a comparable scale, with $270.8B and $0 in trailing revenue. JPM is the more profitable business, keeping 21.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to C's 7.4%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $126.9B | $103.1B | $170.7B | $270.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $4M | $23.4B | $26.3B | $24.1B | $81.3B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $9M | $16.7B | $16.2B | $14.7B | $58.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$768,460 | $15.8B | -$6.7B | -$76.0B | -$119.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +41.1% | +55.6% | +41.7% | +58.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | +14.5% | +17.1% | +10.0% | +27.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | +11.3% | +13.0% | +7.4% | +21.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | -12.1% | -2.0% | -15.3% | -15.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -16.7% | +45.8% | +48.9% | +23.2% | +16.0% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — C and JPM each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 15.3x trailing earnings, JPM trades at a 79% valuation discount to SIMA's 72.7x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), JPM offers better value at 1.18x vs MS's 2.73x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $251M | $290.9B | $307.1B | $219.4B | $814.7B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $250M | $725.8B | $591.9B | $533.4B | $1.10T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 72.67x | 23.10x | 24.28x | 21.10x | 15.30x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 15.79x | 16.24x | 11.61x | 13.56x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.65x | 2.73x | — | 1.18x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 52.66x | 34.91x | 26.01x | 24.98x | 13.21x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 2.29x | 2.98x | 1.29x | 3.01x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.48x | 2.56x | 2.95x | 1.14x | 2.52x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
JPM leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
JPM delivers a 16.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $16 in annual profit, vs $2 for SIMA. JPM carries lower financial leverage with a 2.18x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to GS's 5.06x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MS scores 5/9 vs SIMA's 3/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +2.1% | +12.6% | +14.6% | +6.9% | +16.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +3.8% | +0.9% | +1.2% | +0.6% | +1.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | +1.9% | +2.9% | +1.6% | +5.4% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -0.2% | +3.6% | +3.8% | +3.0% | +8.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 5.06x | 3.42x | 2.82x | 2.18x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$697,085 | $434.8B | $284.7B | $314.0B | $281.8B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $697,085 | $182.1B | $75.7B | $276.5B | $469.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $0 | $616.9B | $360.5B | $590.6B | $751.1B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 0.31x | 0.44x | 0.24x | 0.74x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
GS leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in GS five years ago would be worth $26,886 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $10,944 for SIMA. Over the past 12 months, C leads with a +78.6% total return vs SIMA's +6.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors GS at 44.0% vs SIMA's 3.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +3.1% | +2.9% | +7.2% | +6.8% | -6.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +6.2% | +68.3% | +61.7% | +78.6% | +21.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +9.4% | +198.5% | +141.8% | +185.4% | +131.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +9.4% | +168.9% | +142.9% | +81.5% | +101.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +9.4% | +541.0% | +743.3% | +228.5% | +454.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +3.1% | +44.0% | +34.2% | +41.8% | +32.3% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — SIMA and MS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
SIMA is the less volatile stock with a -0.01 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than GS's 1.47 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MS currently trades 99.1% from its 52-week high vs SIMA's 84.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -0.01x | 1.47x | 1.36x | 1.46x | 1.00x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $12.90 | $984.70 | $194.83 | $135.29 | $337.25 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $10.10 | $558.21 | $119.99 | $70.95 | $251.55 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +84.5% | +95.1% | +99.1% | +92.8% | +89.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 53.8 | 55.7 | 59.9 | 60.0 | 48.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 98K | 2.0M | 5.3M | 11.5M | 8.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — C and JPM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: GS as "Hold", MS as "Buy", C as "Buy", JPM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 12.1% upside for JPM (target: $339) vs 4.7% for GS (target: $981). For income investors, C offers the higher dividend yield at 2.18% vs GS's 1.44%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $980.78 | $203.00 | $140.50 | $338.78 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 55 | 52 | 27 | 61 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.4% | +2.0% | +2.2% | +1.7% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 12 | 11 | 3 | 14 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $13.48 | $3.81 | $2.73 | $5.13 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +3.5% | +1.4% | +3.4% | +3.5% |
JPM leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). GS leads in 1 (Total Returns). 3 tied.
SIMA vs GS vs MS vs C vs JPM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SIMA or GS or MS or C or JPM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
(GS) is the stronger pick with 17. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 9. 9% for Citigroup Inc. (C). JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) offers the better valuation at 15. 3x trailing P/E (13. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Morgan Stanley (MS) a "Buy" — based on 52 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 — SIMA or GS or MS or C or JPM?
On trailing P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the cheapest at 15. 3x versus SIM Acquisition Corp. I at 72. 7x. On forward P/E, Citigroup Inc. is actually cheaper at 11. 6x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: JPMorgan Chase & Co. wins at 1. 04x versus Morgan Stanley's 1. 82x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — SIMA or GS or MS or C or JPM?
Over the past 5 years, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
(GS) delivered a total return of +168. 9%, compared to +9. 4% for SIM Acquisition Corp. I (SIMA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MS returned +743. 3% versus SIMA's +9. 4%. 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 — SIMA or GS or MS or C or JPM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), SIM Acquisition Corp.
I (SIMA) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 01β versus The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. 's 1. 47β — meaning GS is approximately -27775% more volatile than SIMA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 5% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — SIMA or GS or MS or C or JPM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
(GS) is pulling ahead at 17. 0% versus 9. 9% for Citigroup Inc. (C). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. grew EPS 77. 3% year-over-year, compared to 21. 7% for JPMorgan Chase & Co.. 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 — SIMA or GS or MS or C or JPM?
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the more profitable company, earning 21. 6% net margin versus 0. 0% for SIM Acquisition Corp. I — meaning it keeps 21. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: JPM leads at 27. 7% versus 0. 0% for SIMA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — JPM leads at 58. 6%, 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 SIMA or GS or MS or C or JPM 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, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 04x versus Morgan Stanley's 1. 82x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Citigroup Inc. (C) trades at 11. 6x forward P/E versus 16. 2x for Morgan Stanley — 4. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for JPM: 12. 1% to $338. 78.
08Which pays a better dividend — SIMA or GS or MS or C or JPM?
In this comparison, C (2.
2% yield), MS (2. 0% yield), JPM (1. 7% yield), GS (1. 4% yield) pay a dividend. SIMA does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is SIMA or GS or MS or C or JPM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, SIM Acquisition Corp.
I (SIMA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 01)). Both have compounded well over 10 years (SIMA: +9. 4%, C: +228. 5%), 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 SIMA and GS and MS and C and JPM?
Both stocks operate in the Financial Services sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: SIMA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; GS is a large-cap high-growth stock; MS is a large-cap high-growth stock; C is a large-cap quality compounder stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock. GS, MS, C, JPM pay a dividend while SIMA 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.