Asset Management
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
SWKH vs PFLT vs ARCC vs GBDC vs TPVG
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Asset Management
Asset Management
Asset Management
Asset Management
SWKH vs PFLT vs ARCC vs GBDC vs TPVG — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Asset Management | Asset Management | Asset Management | Asset Management | Asset Management |
| Market Cap | $192M | $888M | $13.61B | $3.43B | $243M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $41M | $172M | $3.15B | $871M | $97M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $23M | $118M | $1.15B | $205M | $-12M |
| Gross Margin | — | 45.6% | 75.7% | 81.5% | 83.5% |
| Operating Margin | 48.9% | 39.4% | 69.7% | 78.9% | 77.9% |
| Forward P/E | 7.6x | 7.9x | 9.9x | 9.2x | 6.5x |
| Total Debt | $32M | $1.78B | $15.99B | $4.90B | $469M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $43M | $123M | $924M | $24M | $20M |
SWKH vs PFLT vs ARCC vs GBDC vs TPVG — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | Apr 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWK Holdings Corpor… (SWKH) | 100 | 145.9 | +45.9% |
| PennantPark Floatin… (PFLT) | 100 | 96.6 | -3.4% |
| Ares Capital Corpor… (ARCC) | 100 | 122.0 | +22.0% |
| Golub Capital BDC, … (GBDC) | 100 | 104.3 | +4.3% |
| TriplePoint Venture… (TPVG) | 100 | 49.8 | -50.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SWKH vs PFLT vs ARCC vs GBDC vs TPVG
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
SWKH ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 164.3% 10Y total return vs ARCC's 139.2%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.01, Low D/E 13.7%, current ratio 9.41x
- Beta 0.01 vs TPVG's 0.83, lower leverage
PFLT is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 3 yrs, beta 0.79, yield 13.5%
Among these 5 stocks, ARCC doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
GBDC carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and valuation efficiency.
- Rev growth 42.5%, EPS growth 4.4%
- PEG 0.30 vs TPVG's 6.41
- Beta 0.64, yield 10.5%, current ratio 5.35x
- 42.5% NII/revenue growth vs SWKH's -7.8%
TPVG is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if bank quality is your priority.
- NIM 7.4% vs ARCC's 3.6%
- Lower P/E (6.5x vs 9.9x)
- 17.1% yield, vs PFLT's 13.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
- +19.3% vs ARCC's +0.4%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 42.5% NII/revenue growth vs SWKH's -7.8% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (6.5x vs 9.9x) | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.0% vs SWKH's 0.4% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.01 vs TPVG's 0.83, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 17.1% yield, vs PFLT's 13.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +19.3% vs ARCC's +0.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.0% vs SWKH's 0.4% |
SWKH vs PFLT vs ARCC vs GBDC vs TPVG — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
SWKH leads in 3 of 6 categories
TPVG leads 1 • PFLT leads 0 • ARCC leads 0 • GBDC leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TPVG leads this category, winning 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ARCC is the larger business by revenue, generating $3.1B annually — 75.9x SWKH's $41M. TPVG is the more profitable business, keeping 50.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to SWKH's -6.1%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $41M | $172M | $3.1B | $871M | $97M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $25M | $39M | $2.0B | $431M | -$22M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $23M | $118M | $1.1B | $205M | -$12M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $23M | $242M | $1.1B | $313M | $35M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +45.6% | +75.7% | +81.5% | +83.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +48.9% | +39.4% | +69.7% | +78.9% | +77.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -6.1% | +38.7% | +41.3% | +43.2% | +50.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +65.8% | +55.4% | +36.3% | -13.0% | -58.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +157.1% | +40.9% | -63.9% | -160.0% | -2.3% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — SWKH and TPVG each lead in 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 4.9x trailing earnings, TPVG trades at a 61% valuation discount to PFLT's 12.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), GBDC offers better value at 0.30x vs TPVG's 4.84x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $192M | $888M | $13.6B | $3.4B | $243M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $182M | $2.5B | $28.7B | $8.3B | $691M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -75.71x | 12.43x | 10.19x | 9.26x | 4.91x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 7.58x | 7.93x | 9.92x | 9.15x | 6.50x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.40x | 0.99x | 0.30x | 4.84x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 8.94x | 37.66x | 13.09x | 12.08x | 9.13x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 4.64x | 5.18x | 4.33x | 3.93x | 2.50x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.82x | 0.77x | 0.93x | 0.88x | 0.68x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 7.05x | 9.34x | 11.92x | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
SWKH leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
PFLT delivers a 11.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $11 in annual profit, vs $-3 for TPVG. SWKH carries lower financial leverage with a 0.14x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to PFLT's 1.65x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), SWKH scores 5/9 vs GBDC's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +8.4% | +11.2% | +8.1% | +5.2% | -3.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +7.3% | +4.3% | +3.8% | +2.3% | -1.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +5.1% | +2.1% | +5.7% | +5.9% | +7.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +6.8% | +2.7% | +7.5% | +7.8% | +9.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.14x | 1.65x | 1.12x | 1.23x | 1.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$11M | $1.7B | $15.1B | $4.9B | $449M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $43M | $123M | $924M | $24M | $20M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $32M | $1.8B | $16.0B | $4.9B | $469M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 7.40x | 0.35x | 2.98x | 1.62x | -1.02x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
SWKH leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in SWKH five years ago would be worth $15,781 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8,649 for TPVG. Over the past 12 months, TPVG leads with a +19.3% total return vs ARCC's +0.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors SWKH at 13.8% vs TPVG's -1.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -7.2% | -0.4% | -4.9% | -0.7% | -6.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +15.4% | +1.5% | +0.4% | +3.3% | +19.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +47.5% | +18.2% | +34.2% | +35.3% | -3.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +57.8% | +17.2% | +47.0% | +33.2% | -13.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +164.3% | +72.6% | +139.2% | +61.0% | +93.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +13.8% | +5.7% | +10.3% | +10.6% | -1.2% |
Risk & Volatility
SWKH leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
SWKH 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. SWKH currently trades 88.8% from its 52-week high vs TPVG's 79.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.01x | 0.79x | 0.77x | 0.64x | 0.83x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $17.90 | $10.88 | $23.42 | $15.63 | $7.53 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $13.32 | $7.68 | $17.40 | $11.77 | $4.48 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +88.8% | +82.3% | +81.0% | +84.1% | +79.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 33.4 | 68.2 | 56.7 | 52.8 | 58.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 17K | 987K | 7.5M | 2.4M | 504K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — PFLT and TPVG each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: SWKH as "Buy", PFLT as "Buy", ARCC as "Buy", GBDC as "Buy", TPVG as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 49.4% upside for TPVG (target: $9) vs 9.0% for GBDC (target: $14). For income investors, TPVG offers the higher dividend yield at 17.11% vs ARCC's 2.02%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $10.50 | $21.88 | $14.33 | $8.95 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 1 | 11 | 32 | 11 | 12 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +13.5% | +2.0% | +10.5% | +17.1% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $1.21 | $0.38 | $1.38 | $1.02 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +2.3% | 0.0% |
SWKH leads in 3 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). TPVG leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 2 tied.
SWKH vs PFLT vs ARCC vs GBDC vs TPVG: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SWKH or PFLT or ARCC or GBDC or TPVG a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Golub Capital BDC, Inc.
(GBDC) is the stronger pick with 42. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -7. 8% for SWK Holdings Corporation (SWKH). TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp. (TPVG) offers the better valuation at 4. 9x trailing P/E (6. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate SWK Holdings Corporation (SWKH) 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 — SWKH or PFLT or ARCC or GBDC or TPVG?
On trailing P/E, TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp.
(TPVG) is the cheapest at 4. 9x versus PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd. at 12. 4x. On forward P/E, TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp. is actually cheaper at 6. 5x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Golub Capital BDC, Inc. wins at 0. 30x 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 — SWKH or PFLT or ARCC or GBDC or TPVG?
Over the past 5 years, SWK Holdings Corporation (SWKH) delivered a total return of +57.
8%, compared to -13. 5% for TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp. (TPVG). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: SWKH returned +164. 3% versus GBDC's +61. 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 — SWKH or PFLT or ARCC or GBDC or TPVG?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), SWK Holdings Corporation (SWKH) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
01β versus TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp. 's 0. 83β — meaning TPVG is approximately 6298% more volatile than SWKH relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, SWK Holdings Corporation (SWKH) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 14% versus 165% for PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — SWKH or PFLT or ARCC or GBDC or TPVG?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Golub Capital BDC, Inc.
(GBDC) is pulling ahead at 42. 5% versus -7. 8% for SWK Holdings Corporation (SWKH). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp. grew EPS 48. 8% year-over-year, compared to -119. 4% for SWK Holdings Corporation. 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 — SWKH or PFLT or ARCC or GBDC or TPVG?
TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp.
(TPVG) is the more profitable company, earning 50. 6% net margin versus -6. 1% for SWK Holdings Corporation — meaning it keeps 50. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: GBDC leads at 78. 9% versus 39. 4% for PFLT. 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 SWKH or PFLT or ARCC or GBDC or TPVG 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, Golub Capital BDC, Inc. (GBDC) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 30x 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, TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp. (TPVG) trades at 6. 5x forward P/E versus 9. 9x for Ares Capital Corporation — 3. 4x 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 — SWKH or PFLT or ARCC or GBDC or TPVG?
In this comparison, TPVG (17.
1% yield), PFLT (13. 5% yield), GBDC (10. 5% yield), ARCC (2. 0% yield) pay a dividend. SWKH does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is SWKH or PFLT or ARCC or GBDC or TPVG better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, SWK Holdings Corporation (SWKH) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
01), +164. 3% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (SWKH: +164. 3%, 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 SWKH and PFLT and ARCC and GBDC and TPVG?
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: SWKH is a small-cap quality compounder stock; PFLT is a small-cap deep-value stock; ARCC is a mid-cap high-growth stock; GBDC is a small-cap high-growth stock; TPVG is a small-cap high-growth stock. PFLT, ARCC, GBDC, TPVG pay a dividend while SWKH 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.