Advertising Agencies
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
STFS vs AMZN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Specialty Retail
STFS vs AMZN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Advertising Agencies | Specialty Retail |
| Market Cap | $97M | $2.92T |
| Revenue (TTM) | $21M | $742.78B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $317K | $90.80B |
| Gross Margin | 8.3% | 50.6% |
| Operating Margin | 1.5% | 11.5% |
| Forward P/E | 59.2x | 34.8x |
| Total Debt | $5M | $152.99B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $1M | $86.81B |
STFS vs AMZN — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Oct 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Star Fashion Cultur… (STFS) | 100 | 5.2 | -94.8% |
| Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) | 100 | 145.5 | +45.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: STFS vs AMZN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
STFS is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 57.6%, EPS growth 27.8%
- Lower volatility, beta -0.01, Low D/E 23.8%, current ratio 1.57x
- Beta -0.01, current ratio 1.57x
AMZN carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding.
- 7.0% 10Y total return vs STFS's -93.9%
- Lower P/E (34.8x vs 59.2x)
- 12.2% margin vs STFS's 1.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 57.6% revenue growth vs AMZN's 12.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (34.8x vs 59.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 12.2% margin vs STFS's 1.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Lower D/E ratio (23.8% vs 37.2%) | |
| Dividends | Tie | Neither stock pays a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +43.7% vs STFS's -84.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 11.5% ROA vs STFS's 0.3%, ROIC 14.7% vs 142.7% |
STFS vs AMZN — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
STFS vs AMZN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AMZN leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AMZN is the larger business by revenue, generating $742.8B annually — 35604.9x STFS's $21M. AMZN is the more profitable business, keeping 12.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to STFS's 1.5%. On growth, STFS holds the edge at +21.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $21M | $742.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $249,029 | $155.9B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $316,927 | $90.8B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$879,317 | -$2.5B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +8.3% | +50.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +1.5% | +11.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +1.5% | +12.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -4.2% | -0.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +21.8% | +16.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -120.7% | +74.8% |
Valuation Metrics
AMZN leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 37.8x trailing earnings, AMZN trades at a 36% valuation discount to STFS's 59.2x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, AMZN's 20.5x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than STFS's 47.0x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $97M | $2.92T |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $98M | $2.98T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 59.18x | 37.82x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 34.77x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.35x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 46.96x | 20.47x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 6.08x | 4.07x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 29.49x | 7.14x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 91.44x | 378.98x |
Profitability & Efficiency
STFS leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
AMZN delivers a 23.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $23 in annual profit, vs $1 for STFS. STFS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.24x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to AMZN's 0.37x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), AMZN scores 6/9 vs STFS's 5/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +0.5% | +23.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.3% | +11.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +142.7% | +14.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +11.7% | +15.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.24x | 0.37x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $4M | $66.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1M | $86.8B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $5M | $153.0B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 19.18x | 39.96x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
AMZN leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in AMZN five years ago would be worth $16,476 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $614 for STFS. Over the past 12 months, AMZN leads with a +43.7% total return vs STFS's -84.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors AMZN at 36.8% vs STFS's -60.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +99.5% | +19.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -84.3% | +43.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -93.9% | +156.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -93.9% | +64.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -93.9% | +697.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -60.6% | +36.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — STFS and AMZN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
STFS is the less volatile stock with a -0.01 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than AMZN's 1.51 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. AMZN currently trades 97.3% from its 52-week high vs STFS's 7.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -0.01x | 1.51x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $104.00 | $278.56 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.11 | $185.01 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +7.7% | +97.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 95.2 | 81.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 153K | 45.5M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $306.77 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 94 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% |
AMZN leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). STFS leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 1 tied.
STFS vs AMZN: Frequently Asked Questions
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is STFS or AMZN a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Star Fashion Culture Holdings Limited (STFS) is the stronger pick with 57.
6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 12. 4% for Amazon. com, Inc. (AMZN). Amazon. com, Inc. (AMZN) offers the better valuation at 37. 8x trailing P/E (34. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Amazon. com, Inc. (AMZN) a "Buy" — based on 94 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 — STFS or AMZN?
On trailing P/E, Amazon.
com, Inc. (AMZN) is the cheapest at 37. 8x versus Star Fashion Culture Holdings Limited at 59. 2x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — STFS or AMZN?
Over the past 5 years, Amazon.
com, Inc. (AMZN) delivered a total return of +64. 8%, compared to -93. 9% for Star Fashion Culture Holdings Limited (STFS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AMZN returned +697. 8% versus STFS's -93. 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 — STFS or AMZN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Star Fashion Culture Holdings Limited (STFS) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
01β versus Amazon. com, Inc. 's 1. 51β — meaning AMZN is approximately -11812% more volatile than STFS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Star Fashion Culture Holdings Limited (STFS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 24% versus 37% for Amazon. com, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — STFS or AMZN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Star Fashion Culture Holdings Limited (STFS) is pulling ahead at 57.
6% versus 12. 4% for Amazon. com, Inc. (AMZN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Amazon. com, Inc. grew EPS 29. 7% year-over-year, compared to 27. 8% for Star Fashion Culture Holdings Limited. 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 — STFS or AMZN?
Amazon.
com, Inc. (AMZN) is the more profitable company, earning 10. 8% net margin versus 10. 3% for Star Fashion Culture Holdings Limited — meaning it keeps 10. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: STFS leads at 12. 9% versus 11. 2% for AMZN. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — AMZN leads at 50. 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.
07Which pays a better dividend — STFS or AMZN?
None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.
All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.
08Is STFS or AMZN better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Star Fashion Culture Holdings Limited (STFS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
01)). Amazon. com, Inc. (AMZN) carries a higher beta of 1. 51 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (STFS: -93. 9%, AMZN: +697. 8%), 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.
09What are the main differences between STFS and AMZN?
These companies operate in different sectors (STFS (Communication Services) and AMZN (Consumer Cyclical)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: STFS is a small-cap high-growth stock; AMZN is a mega-cap quality compounder 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 both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.