Specialty Retail
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
TBHC vs COHN vs GAIN vs MKTW
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Capital Markets
Asset Management
Software - Application
TBHC vs COHN vs GAIN vs MKTW — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Specialty Retail | Financial - Capital Markets | Asset Management | Software - Application |
| Market Cap | $12M | $87M | $657M | $44M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $410M | $278M | $90M | $321M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-28M | $14M | $130M | $4M |
| Gross Margin | 24.1% | 93.8% | 68.6% | 86.2% |
| Operating Margin | -5.4% | 22.3% | 72.7% | 14.1% |
| Forward P/E | — | 3.3x | 40.7x | 7.2x |
| Total Debt | $194M | $450M | $456M | $6M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $4M | $57M | $14M | $70M |
TBHC vs COHN vs GAIN vs MKTW — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Sep 20 | Apr 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Brand House Col… (TBHC) | 100 | 11.4 | -88.6% |
| Cohen & Company Inc. (COHN) | 100 | 77.1 | -22.9% |
| Gladstone Investmen… (GAIN) | 100 | 156.0 | +56.0% |
| MarketWise, Inc. (MKTW) | 100 | 9.4 | -90.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TBHC vs COHN vs GAIN vs MKTW
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TBHC is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth -5.8%, EPS growth 18.1%, 3Y rev CAGR -7.5%
COHN carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.48, current ratio 3.87x
- 249.6% NII/revenue growth vs MKTW's -19.7%
- Lower P/E (3.3x vs 40.7x)
- +106.3% vs TBHC's -19.0%
GAIN is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 319.3% 10Y total return vs COHN's 156.3%
- 72.7% margin vs TBHC's -6.8%
- 10.5% ROA vs TBHC's -12.1%, ROIC 5.3% vs -6.1%
MKTW is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.37, yield 11.8%
- Beta 0.37, yield 11.8%, current ratio 0.56x
- Beta 0.37 vs TBHC's 1.84
- 11.8% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs COHN's 2.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 249.6% NII/revenue growth vs MKTW's -19.7% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (3.3x vs 40.7x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 72.7% margin vs TBHC's -6.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.37 vs TBHC's 1.84 | |
| Dividends | 11.8% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs COHN's 2.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +106.3% vs TBHC's -19.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 10.5% ROA vs TBHC's -12.1%, ROIC 5.3% vs -6.1% |
TBHC vs COHN vs GAIN vs MKTW — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
TBHC vs COHN vs GAIN vs MKTW — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
GAIN leads in 1 of 6 categories
COHN leads 1 • TBHC leads 0 • MKTW leads 0 • 4 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
GAIN leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TBHC is the larger business by revenue, generating $410M annually — 4.6x GAIN's $90M. GAIN is the more profitable business, keeping 72.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to TBHC's -6.8%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $410M | $278M | $90M | $321M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$14M | $63M | $58M | $47M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$28M | $14M | $130M | $4M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$19M | $26M | -$82M | $43M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +24.1% | +93.8% | +68.6% | +86.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -5.4% | +22.3% | +72.7% | +14.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -6.8% | +5.2% | +72.7% | +1.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -4.6% | +9.4% | +126.8% | +13.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -9.6% | — | — | -8.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +72.9% | +5.4% | +58.1% | -156.1% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — TBHC and MKTW each lead in 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 3.3x trailing earnings, COHN trades at a 65% valuation discount to GAIN's 9.3x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, COHN's 7.6x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than GAIN's 16.8x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $12M | $87M | $657M | $44M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $202M | $481M | $1.1B | -$20M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.53x | 3.27x | 9.28x | 7.20x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 40.66x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 7.65x | 16.82x | -0.31x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.03x | 0.31x | 7.31x | 0.13x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 0.82x | 1.22x | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 3.34x | 5.77x | 0.96x |
Profitability & Efficiency
COHN leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
GAIN delivers a 21.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $22 in annual profit, vs $15 for COHN. GAIN carries lower financial leverage with a 0.91x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to COHN's 4.37x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), COHN scores 6/9 vs TBHC's 3/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | +15.1% | +21.9% | — |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -12.1% | +1.6% | +10.5% | +2.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -6.1% | +12.2% | +5.3% | — |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -12.2% | +7.6% | +6.8% | — |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 6 | 4 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 4.37x | 0.91x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $190M | $393M | $441M | -$64M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $4M | $57M | $14M | $70M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $194M | $450M | $456M | $6M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -3.49x | 8.32x | 1.58x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — COHN and GAIN each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in GAIN five years ago would be worth $17,205 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $293 for TBHC. Over the past 12 months, COHN leads with a +106.3% total return vs TBHC's -19.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors COHN at 45.3% vs TBHC's -31.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -20.3% | -31.3% | +20.7% | +13.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -19.0% | +106.3% | +30.8% | +32.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -67.7% | +206.8% | +56.5% | -27.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -97.1% | -35.6% | +72.0% | -88.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -93.9% | +156.3% | +319.3% | -88.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -31.4% | +45.3% | +16.1% | -10.1% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — GAIN and MKTW each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MKTW is the less volatile stock with a 0.37 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than TBHC's 1.84 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. GAIN currently trades 96.3% from its 52-week high vs TBHC's 39.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.84x | 0.48x | 0.53x | 0.37x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $2.40 | $32.60 | $17.14 | $21.74 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.86 | $7.78 | $13.11 | $13.37 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +39.2% | +43.6% | +96.3% | +76.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 40.7 | 31.0 | 69.9 | 48.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 70K | 28K | 371K | 26K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — TBHC and MKTW each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: GAIN as "Hold", MKTW as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply -9.1% upside for GAIN (target: $15) vs -79.0% for MKTW (target: $4). For income investors, MKTW offers the higher dividend yield at 11.79% vs COHN's 2.51%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | — | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | — | $15.00 | $3.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | — | 7 | 7 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +2.5% | +10.0% | +11.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.36 | $1.66 | $1.96 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +7.7% |
GAIN leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). COHN leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 4 tied.
TBHC vs COHN vs GAIN vs MKTW: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TBHC or COHN or GAIN or MKTW a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Cohen & Company Inc.
(COHN) is the stronger pick with 249. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -19. 7% for MarketWise, Inc. (MKTW). Cohen & Company Inc. (COHN) offers the better valuation at 3. 3x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Gladstone Investment Corporation (GAIN) a "Hold" — based on 7 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 — TBHC or COHN or GAIN or MKTW?
On trailing P/E, Cohen & Company Inc.
(COHN) is the cheapest at 3. 3x versus Gladstone Investment Corporation at 9. 3x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TBHC or COHN or GAIN or MKTW?
Over the past 5 years, Gladstone Investment Corporation (GAIN) delivered a total return of +72.
0%, compared to -97. 1% for The Brand House Collective, Inc. (TBHC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GAIN returned +319. 3% versus TBHC'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 — TBHC or COHN or GAIN or MKTW?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), MarketWise, Inc.
(MKTW) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 37β versus The Brand House Collective, Inc. 's 1. 84β — meaning TBHC is approximately 395% more volatile than MKTW relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Gladstone Investment Corporation (GAIN) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 91% versus 4% for Cohen & Company Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — TBHC or COHN or GAIN or MKTW?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Cohen & Company Inc.
(COHN) is pulling ahead at 249. 6% versus -19. 7% for MarketWise, Inc. (MKTW). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Cohen & Company Inc. grew EPS 55. 4% year-over-year, compared to -35. 3% for MarketWise, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, TBHC leads at -7. 5% 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.
06Which has better profit margins — TBHC or COHN or GAIN or MKTW?
Gladstone Investment Corporation (GAIN) is the more profitable company, earning 72.
7% net margin versus -5. 2% for The Brand House Collective, Inc. — meaning it keeps 72. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: GAIN leads at 72. 7% versus -3. 2% for TBHC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — COHN leads at 93. 8%, 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 TBHC or COHN or GAIN or MKTW more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for GAIN: -9.
1% to $15. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — TBHC or COHN or GAIN or MKTW?
In this comparison, MKTW (11.
8% yield), GAIN (10. 0% yield), COHN (2. 5% yield) pay a dividend. TBHC does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is TBHC or COHN or GAIN or MKTW better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Gladstone Investment Corporation (GAIN) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
53), 10. 0% yield, +319. 3% 10Y return). The Brand House Collective, Inc. (TBHC) carries a higher beta of 1. 84 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (GAIN: +319. 3%, TBHC: -93. 9%), 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 TBHC and COHN and GAIN and MKTW?
These companies operate in different sectors (TBHC (Consumer Cyclical) and COHN (Financial Services) and GAIN (Financial Services) and MKTW (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: TBHC is a small-cap quality compounder stock; COHN is a small-cap high-growth stock; GAIN is a small-cap deep-value stock; MKTW is a small-cap deep-value stock. COHN, GAIN, MKTW pay a dividend while TBHC 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.