Shell Companies
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
TACH vs BN vs KKR vs APO vs CG
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Asset Management
Asset Management
Asset Management - Global
Asset Management
TACH vs BN vs KKR vs APO vs CG — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Shell Companies | Asset Management | Asset Management | Asset Management - Global | Asset Management |
| Market Cap | $287M | $101.14B | $85.80B | $77.18B | $16.52B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $76.58B | $19.04B | $29.68B | $3.99B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $5M | $1.33B | $2.37B | $2.15B | $547M |
| Gross Margin | — | 35.3% | 22.5% | 89.3% | 73.1% |
| Operating Margin | — | 28.3% | 12.3% | 31.1% | 22.2% |
| Forward P/E | — | 16.4x | 16.0x | 15.0x | 11.4x |
| Total Debt | $74.00 | $312.61B | $54.77B | $13.36B | $13.89B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $25.00 | $16.24B | $6M | $19.24B | $3.21B |
TACH vs BN vs KKR vs APO vs CG — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 25 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Titan Acquisition C… (TACH) | 100 | 99.5 | -0.5% |
| Brookfield Corporat… (BN) | 100 | 109.7 | +9.7% |
| KKR & Co. Inc. (KKR) | 100 | 72.3 | -27.7% |
| Apollo Global Manag… (APO) | 100 | 94.4 | -5.6% |
| The Carlyle Group I… (CG) | 100 | 89.0 | -11.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TACH vs BN vs KKR vs APO vs CG
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TACH lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
BN carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for quality and momentum.
- Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs APO's 0.5% (lower = leaner)
- +15.1% vs KKR's -22.6%
- Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs APO's 0.5%
Among these 5 stocks, KKR doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
APO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Dividend streak 3 yrs, beta 1.25, yield 1.6%
- 8.7% 10Y total return vs KKR's 6.8%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.25, Low D/E 31.4%, current ratio 0.78x
- PEG 0.20 vs CG's 0.65
CG ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure and bank quality.
- Rev growth 19.8%, EPS growth -21.3%
- NIM 7.1% vs KKR's 0.0%
- 19.8% NII/revenue growth vs BN's -11.5%
- 3.0% yield, vs KKR's 0.8%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 19.8% NII/revenue growth vs BN's -11.5% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs APO's 0.5% (lower = leaner) | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.25 vs CG's 1.67, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.0% yield, vs KKR's 0.8%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +15.1% vs KKR's -22.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | Efficiency ratio 0.1% vs APO's 0.5% |
TACH vs BN vs KKR vs APO vs CG — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
TACH vs BN vs KKR vs APO vs CG — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
APO leads in 2 of 6 categories
BN leads 1 • TACH leads 1 • KKR leads 0 • CG leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
APO leads this category, winning 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
BN and TACH operate at a comparable scale, with $76.6B and $0 in trailing revenue. CG is the more profitable business, keeping 13.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BN's 1.7%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $76.6B | $19.0B | $29.7B | $4.0B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$99,706 | $30.9B | $9.0B | $10.0B | $1.0B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $5M | $1.3B | $2.4B | $2.1B | $547M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$536,520 | -$7.3B | $7.5B | $4.4B | -$1.4B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +35.3% | +22.5% | +89.3% | +73.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | +28.3% | +12.3% | +31.1% | +22.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | +1.7% | +12.4% | +7.2% | +13.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | -9.5% | +39.5% | +14.8% | -33.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +199.3% | -1.7% | -5.8% | -2.1% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — BN and APO each lead in 2 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 18.4x trailing earnings, APO trades at a 80% valuation discount to BN's 90.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), APO offers better value at 0.25x vs CG's 1.19x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $287M | $101.1B | $85.8B | $77.2B | $16.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $287M | $397.5B | $140.6B | $71.3B | $27.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -246.45x | 90.42x | 41.13x | 18.44x | 20.99x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 16.37x | 15.97x | 14.99x | 11.35x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 0.25x | 1.19x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 12.37x | 19.73x | 6.22x | 20.35x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 1.33x | 4.45x | 2.55x | 3.37x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 0.64x | 1.13x | 1.91x | 2.40x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 9.01x | 10.36x | 12.12x |
Profitability & Efficiency
APO leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
TACH delivers a 8.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $8 in annual profit, vs $1 for BN. APO carries lower financial leverage with a 0.31x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CG's 1.97x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), KKR scores 6/9 vs APO's 3/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +8.4% | +0.8% | +3.2% | +5.5% | +7.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +3.8% | +0.3% | +0.6% | +0.5% | +2.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | +3.7% | +0.3% | +16.0% | +5.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | — | +5.1% | +0.1% | +8.8% | +5.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 5 | 6 | 3 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 1.88x | 0.67x | 0.31x | 1.97x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $49 | $296.4B | $54.8B | -$5.9B | $10.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $25 | $16.2B | $6M | $19.2B | $3.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $74 | $312.6B | $54.8B | $13.4B | $13.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 1.34x | 3.29x | 26.54x | 1.84x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
BN leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in APO five years ago would be worth $24,874 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $10,297 for TACH. Over the past 12 months, BN leads with a +15.1% total return vs KKR's -22.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors BN at 29.0% vs TACH's 1.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +1.7% | -2.9% | -25.0% | -8.0% | -23.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +3.0% | +15.1% | -22.6% | -1.5% | -1.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +3.0% | +114.7% | +76.7% | +89.6% | +64.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +3.0% | +72.2% | +80.1% | +148.7% | +20.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +3.0% | +290.7% | +682.0% | +867.6% | +273.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +1.0% | +29.0% | +20.9% | +23.8% | +18.1% |
Risk & Volatility
TACH leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
TACH is the less volatile stock with a -0.02 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CG's 1.67 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. TACH currently trades 94.5% from its 52-week high vs KKR's 62.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -0.02x | 1.58x | 1.58x | 1.25x | 1.67x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $11.00 | $49.57 | $153.87 | $157.28 | $69.85 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $10.04 | $37.93 | $82.67 | $99.56 | $41.54 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +94.5% | +91.2% | +62.5% | +85.1% | +65.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 54.1 | 49.7 | 48.8 | 59.5 | 43.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 32K | 4.7M | 4.2M | 3.4M | 3.1M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — KKR and CG each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: BN as "Buy", KKR as "Buy", APO as "Buy", CG as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 46.7% upside for KKR (target: $141) vs 14.7% for APO (target: $154). For income investors, CG offers the higher dividend yield at 2.98% vs KKR's 0.84%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $56.80 | $141.14 | $153.50 | $61.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 9 | 27 | 28 | 25 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +0.8% | +1.6% | +3.0% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 2 | 6 | 3 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $0.80 | $2.14 | $1.36 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.1% | +1.0% | +4.2% |
APO leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). BN leads in 1 (Total Returns). 2 tied.
TACH vs BN vs KKR vs APO vs CG: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TACH or BN or KKR or APO or CG a better buy right now?
For growth investors, The Carlyle Group Inc.
(CG) is the stronger pick with 19. 8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -11. 5% for Brookfield Corporation (BN). Apollo Global Management, Inc. (APO) offers the better valuation at 18. 4x trailing P/E (15. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Brookfield Corporation (BN) a "Buy" — based on 9 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 — TACH or BN or KKR or APO or CG?
On trailing P/E, Apollo Global Management, Inc.
(APO) is the cheapest at 18. 4x versus Brookfield Corporation at 90. 4x. On forward P/E, The Carlyle Group Inc. is actually cheaper at 11. 4x — 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: Apollo Global Management, Inc. wins at 0. 20x versus The Carlyle Group Inc. 's 0. 65x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TACH or BN or KKR or APO or CG?
Over the past 5 years, Apollo Global Management, Inc.
(APO) delivered a total return of +148. 7%, compared to +3. 0% for Titan Acquisition Corp. (TACH). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: APO returned +867. 6% versus TACH's +3. 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 — TACH or BN or KKR or APO or CG?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Titan Acquisition Corp.
(TACH) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 02β versus The Carlyle Group Inc. 's 1. 67β — meaning CG is approximately -7367% more volatile than TACH relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Apollo Global Management, Inc. (APO) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 31% versus 197% for The Carlyle Group Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — TACH or BN or KKR or APO or CG?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), The Carlyle Group Inc.
(CG) is pulling ahead at 19. 8% versus -11. 5% for Brookfield Corporation (BN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Brookfield Corporation grew EPS 141. 9% year-over-year, compared to -28. 7% for KKR & Co. Inc.. 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 — TACH or BN or KKR or APO or CG?
The Carlyle Group Inc.
(CG) is the more profitable company, earning 16. 5% net margin versus 0. 0% for Titan Acquisition Corp. — meaning it keeps 16. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: APO leads at 34. 4% versus 0. 0% for TACH. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — APO leads at 88. 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 TACH or BN or KKR or APO or CG 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, Apollo Global Management, Inc. (APO) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 20x versus The Carlyle Group Inc. 's 0. 65x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, The Carlyle Group Inc. (CG) trades at 11. 4x forward P/E versus 16. 4x for Brookfield Corporation — 5. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for KKR: 46. 7% to $141. 14.
08Which pays a better dividend — TACH or BN or KKR or APO or CG?
In this comparison, CG (3.
0% yield), APO (1. 6% yield), KKR (0. 8% yield) pay a dividend. TACH, BN do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is TACH or BN or KKR or APO or CG better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Titan Acquisition Corp.
(TACH) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 02)). Brookfield Corporation (BN) carries a higher beta of 1. 58 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (TACH: +3. 0%, BN: +290. 7%), 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 TACH and BN and KKR and APO and CG?
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: TACH is a small-cap quality compounder stock; BN is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; KKR is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; APO is a mid-cap high-growth stock; CG is a mid-cap high-growth stock. KKR, APO, CG pay a dividend while TACH, BN 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.