TANH vs CBAT

For growth investors, Tantech Holdings Ltd (TANH) is the stronger pick with -9.

3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -13. 6% for CBAK Energy Technology, Inc. (CBAT). CBAK Energy Technology, Inc. (CBAT) offers the better valuation at 6. 1x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. 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.

Over the past 5 years, CBAK Energy Technology, Inc.

(CBAT) delivered a total return of -78. 7%, compared to -100. 0% for Tantech Holdings Ltd (TANH). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CBAT returned -69. 7% versus TANH's -100. 0%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Tantech Holdings Ltd (TANH) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

82β versus CBAK Energy Technology, Inc. 's 1. 01β — meaning CBAT is approximately 22% more volatile than TANH relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Tantech Holdings Ltd (TANH) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 4% versus 25% for CBAK Energy Technology, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Tantech Holdings Ltd (TANH) is pulling ahead at -9.

3% versus -13. 6% for CBAK Energy Technology, Inc. (CBAT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: CBAK Energy Technology, Inc. grew EPS 574. 5% year-over-year, compared to -107. 1% for Tantech Holdings Ltd. Over a 3-year CAGR, CBAT leads at 49. 7% 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.

CBAK Energy Technology, Inc.

(CBAT) is the more profitable company, earning 6. 7% net margin versus -7. 5% for Tantech Holdings Ltd — meaning it keeps 6. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: TANH leads at 9. 3% versus 5. 0% for CBAT. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CBAT leads at 23. 7%, 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.

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.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Tantech Holdings Ltd (TANH) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

82)). Both have compounded well over 10 years (TANH: -100. 0%, CBAT: -69. 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.

These companies operate in different sectors (TANH (Consumer Defensive) and CBAT (Industrials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

In terms of investment character: TANH is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CBAT is a small-cap deep-value 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.