Specialty Retail
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
TBHC vs MKTW vs HIMS vs COHN vs STGW
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Software - Application
Medical - Equipment & Services
Financial - Capital Markets
Advertising Agencies
TBHC vs MKTW vs HIMS vs COHN vs STGW — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Specialty Retail | Software - Application | Medical - Equipment & Services | Financial - Capital Markets | Advertising Agencies |
| Market Cap | $12M | $44M | $6.63B | $87M | $1.64B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $410M | $321M | $2.35B | $278M | $2.96B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-28M | $4M | $128M | $14M | $19M |
| Gross Margin | 24.1% | 86.2% | 69.7% | 93.8% | 34.6% |
| Operating Margin | -5.4% | 14.1% | 4.6% | 22.3% | 5.1% |
| Forward P/E | — | 7.2x | 51.5x | 3.3x | 6.2x |
| Total Debt | $194M | $6M | $1.12B | $450M | $1.61B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $4M | $70M | $229M | $57M | $105M |
TBHC vs MKTW vs HIMS vs COHN vs STGW — 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% |
| MarketWise, Inc. (MKTW) | 100 | 9.4 | -90.6% |
| Hims & Hers Health,… (HIMS) | 100 | 176.8 | +76.8% |
| Cohen & Company Inc. (COHN) | 100 | 77.1 | -22.9% |
| Stagwell Inc. (STGW) | 100 | 391.0 | +291.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TBHC vs MKTW vs HIMS vs COHN vs STGW
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TBHC lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
MKTW is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability is your priority.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.37, yield 11.8%
- Beta 0.37 vs HIMS's 2.40
- 11.8% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs COHN's 2.5%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
HIMS ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding.
- 161.9% 10Y total return vs COHN's 156.3%
- 5.5% margin vs TBHC's -6.8%
- 6.0% ROA vs TBHC's -12.1%, ROIC 10.7% vs -6.1%
COHN carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 249.6%, EPS growth 55.4%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.48, current ratio 3.87x
- Beta 0.48, yield 2.5%, current ratio 3.87x
- 249.6% NII/revenue growth vs MKTW's -19.7%
Among these 5 stocks, STGW doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
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 6.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 5.5% margin vs TBHC's -6.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.37 vs HIMS's 2.40 | |
| Dividends | 11.8% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs COHN's 2.5%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +106.3% vs HIMS's -51.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 6.0% ROA vs TBHC's -12.1%, ROIC 10.7% vs -6.1% |
TBHC vs MKTW vs HIMS vs COHN vs STGW — 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 MKTW vs HIMS vs COHN vs STGW — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
COHN leads in 2 of 6 categories
TBHC leads 0 • MKTW leads 0 • HIMS leads 0 • STGW leads 0 • 4 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
COHN leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
STGW is the larger business by revenue, generating $3.0B annually — 10.6x COHN's $278M. HIMS is the more profitable business, keeping 5.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to TBHC's -6.8%. On growth, HIMS holds the edge at +28.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $410M | $321M | $2.3B | $278M | $3.0B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$14M | $47M | $164M | $63M | $358M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$28M | $4M | $128M | $14M | $19M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$19M | $43M | $73M | $26M | $275M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +24.1% | +86.2% | +69.7% | +93.8% | +34.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -5.4% | +14.1% | +4.6% | +22.3% | +5.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -6.8% | +1.3% | +5.5% | +5.2% | +0.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -4.6% | +13.3% | +3.1% | +9.4% | +9.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -9.6% | -8.5% | +28.4% | — | +8.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +72.9% | -156.1% | -27.3% | +5.4% | -29.3% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — TBHC and MKTW each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 3.3x trailing earnings, COHN trades at a 94% valuation discount to STGW's 58.7x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, COHN's 7.6x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than HIMS's 42.7x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $12M | $44M | $6.6B | $87M | $1.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $202M | -$20M | $7.5B | $481M | $3.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.53x | 7.20x | 50.32x | 3.27x | 58.73x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 51.51x | — | 6.18x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | -0.31x | 42.68x | 7.65x | 7.89x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.03x | 0.13x | 2.82x | 0.31x | 0.56x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | — | 12.25x | 0.82x | 2.13x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 0.96x | 89.61x | 3.34x | 6.62x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — HIMS and COHN each lead in 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
HIMS delivers a 23.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $24 in annual profit, vs $2 for STGW. STGW carries lower financial leverage with a 2.00x 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 | — | — | +23.7% | +15.1% | +2.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -12.1% | +2.0% | +6.0% | +1.6% | +0.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -6.1% | — | +10.7% | +12.2% | +5.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -12.2% | — | +10.9% | +7.6% | +6.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 6 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | — | 2.07x | 4.37x | 2.00x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $190M | -$64M | $892M | $393M | $1.5B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $4M | $70M | $229M | $57M | $105M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $194M | $6M | $1.1B | $450M | $1.6B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -3.49x | — | — | 8.32x | 1.52x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
COHN leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in HIMS five years ago would be worth $23,764 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $293 for TBHC. Over the past 12 months, COHN leads with a +106.3% total return vs HIMS's -51.0%. 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% | +13.5% | -23.2% | -31.3% | +36.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -19.0% | +32.6% | -51.0% | +106.3% | +11.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -67.7% | -27.4% | +116.6% | +206.8% | +10.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -97.1% | -88.3% | +137.6% | -35.6% | +31.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -93.9% | -88.2% | +161.9% | +156.3% | -60.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -31.4% | -10.1% | +29.4% | +45.3% | +3.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MKTW and STGW 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 HIMS's 2.40 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. STGW currently trades 85.9% from its 52-week high vs HIMS's 36.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.84x | 0.37x | 2.40x | 0.48x | 1.17x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $2.40 | $21.74 | $70.43 | $32.60 | $7.52 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.86 | $13.37 | $13.74 | $7.78 | $4.03 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +39.2% | +76.5% | +36.4% | +43.6% | +85.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 40.7 | 48.1 | 54.5 | 31.0 | 47.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 70K | 26K | 34.9M | 28K | 1.7M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — TBHC and MKTW and STGW each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: MKTW as "Hold", HIMS as "Hold", STGW as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 23.8% upside for STGW (target: $8) 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 | — | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $3.50 | $29.67 | — | $8.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 7 | 19 | — | 8 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +11.8% | — | +2.5% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 3 | 1 | — | 1 | 3 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $1.96 | — | $0.36 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +7.7% | +1.4% | 0.0% | +8.2% |
COHN leads in 2 of 6 categories — strongest in Income & Cash Flow and Total Returns. 4 categories are tied.
TBHC vs MKTW vs HIMS vs COHN vs STGW: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TBHC or MKTW or HIMS or COHN or STGW 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 Stagwell Inc. (STGW) a "Buy" — based on 8 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 MKTW or HIMS or COHN or STGW?
On trailing P/E, Cohen & Company Inc.
(COHN) is the cheapest at 3. 3x versus Stagwell Inc. at 58. 7x. On forward P/E, Stagwell Inc. is actually cheaper at 6. 2x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TBHC or MKTW or HIMS or COHN or STGW?
Over the past 5 years, Hims & Hers Health, Inc.
(HIMS) delivered a total return of +137. 6%, compared to -97. 1% for The Brand House Collective, Inc. (TBHC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: HIMS returned +161. 9% 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 MKTW or HIMS or COHN or STGW?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), MarketWise, Inc.
(MKTW) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 37β versus Hims & Hers Health, Inc. 's 2. 40β — meaning HIMS is approximately 548% more volatile than MKTW relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Stagwell Inc. (STGW) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 4% for Cohen & Company Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — TBHC or MKTW or HIMS or COHN or STGW?
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, HIMS leads at 64. 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 MKTW or HIMS or COHN or STGW?
Hims & Hers Health, Inc.
(HIMS) is the more profitable company, earning 5. 5% net margin versus -5. 2% for The Brand House Collective, Inc. — meaning it keeps 5. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: COHN leads at 22. 3% 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 MKTW or HIMS or COHN or STGW more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Stagwell Inc.
(STGW) trades at 6. 2x forward P/E versus 51. 5x for Hims & Hers Health, Inc. — 45. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for STGW: 23. 8% to $8. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — TBHC or MKTW or HIMS or COHN or STGW?
In this comparison, MKTW (11.
8% yield), COHN (2. 5% yield) pay a dividend. TBHC, HIMS, STGW do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is TBHC or MKTW or HIMS or COHN or STGW better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Cohen & Company Inc.
(COHN) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 48), 2. 5% yield, +156. 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 (COHN: +156. 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 MKTW and HIMS and COHN and STGW?
These companies operate in different sectors (TBHC (Consumer Cyclical) and MKTW (Technology) and HIMS (Healthcare) and COHN (Financial Services) and STGW (Communication Services)), 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; MKTW is a small-cap deep-value stock; HIMS is a small-cap high-growth stock; COHN is a small-cap high-growth stock; STGW is a small-cap quality compounder stock. MKTW, COHN pay a dividend while TBHC, HIMS, STGW 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.
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.
- Sector: Communication Services
- Market Cap > $100B
- Revenue Growth > 5%
- Gross Margin > 20%
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.