TGL vs CLPS vs QFIN vs CODA

For growth investors, Coda Octopus Group, Inc.

(CODA) is the stronger pick with 30. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -89. 4% for Treasure Global Inc. (TGL). Qfin Holdings, Inc. (QFIN) offers the better valuation at 2. 1x trailing P/E (0. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Qfin Holdings, Inc. (QFIN) a "Buy" — based on 4 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.

On trailing P/E, Qfin Holdings, Inc.

(QFIN) is the cheapest at 2. 1x versus Coda Octopus Group, Inc. at 32. 2x. On forward P/E, Qfin Holdings, Inc. is actually cheaper at 0. 5x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Qfin Holdings, Inc. wins at 0. 02x versus Coda Octopus Group, Inc. 's 5. 24x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Coda Octopus Group, Inc.

(CODA) delivered a total return of +49. 7%, compared to -100. 0% for Treasure Global Inc. (TGL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CODA returned +844. 4% versus TGL'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), CLPS Incorporation (CLPS) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

27β versus Treasure Global Inc. 's 2. 48β — meaning TGL is approximately 813% more volatile than CLPS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Coda Octopus Group, Inc. (CODA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 59% for CLPS Incorporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Coda Octopus Group, Inc.

(CODA) is pulling ahead at 30. 7% versus -89. 4% for Treasure Global Inc. (TGL). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Treasure Global Inc. grew EPS 94. 8% year-over-year, compared to -181. 4% for CLPS Incorporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, CODA leads at 6. 1% 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.

Qfin Holdings, Inc.

(QFIN) is the more profitable company, earning 36. 5% net margin versus -1003. 1% for Treasure Global Inc. — meaning it keeps 36. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: QFIN leads at 43. 9% versus -945. 3% for TGL. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — TGL leads at 71. 6%, 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.

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, Qfin Holdings, Inc. (QFIN) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 02x versus Coda Octopus Group, Inc. 's 5. 24x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Qfin Holdings, Inc. (QFIN) trades at 0. 5x forward P/E versus 22. 5x for Coda Octopus Group, Inc. — 22. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for QFIN: 113. 1% to $28. 15.

In this comparison, CLPS (14.

6% yield), QFIN (9. 3% yield) pay a dividend. TGL, CODA do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

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

27), 14. 6% yield). Treasure Global Inc. (TGL) carries a higher beta of 2. 48 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (CLPS: -78. 5%, TGL: -100. 0%), 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 (TGL (Technology) and CLPS (Technology) and QFIN (Financial Services) and CODA (Industrials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

In terms of investment character: TGL is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CLPS is a small-cap high-growth stock; QFIN is a small-cap deep-value stock; CODA is a small-cap high-growth stock. CLPS, QFIN pay a dividend while TGL, CODA 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.