Household & Personal Products
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
TKLF vs CANG
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Auto - Dealerships
TKLF vs CANG — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Household & Personal Products | Auto - Dealerships |
| Market Cap | $887K | $254M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $390M | $3.46B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $1.00B | $-178M |
| Gross Margin | 11.4% | 13.6% |
| Operating Margin | 2.3% | 7.3% |
| Forward P/E | 0.0x | 5.8x |
| Total Debt | $10.69B | $170M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $721M | $1.29B |
TKLF vs CANG — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jan 22 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tokyo Lifestyle Co.… (TKLF) | 100 | 5.0 | -95.0% |
| Cango Inc. (CANG) | 100 | 33.0 | -67.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TKLF vs CANG
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TKLF carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- beta 0.76
- Rev growth 159.7%, EPS growth 152.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 411.6%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.76, current ratio 1.35x
CANG is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- -44.7% 10Y total return vs TKLF's -99.3%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 159.7% revenue growth vs CANG's -52.7% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (0.0x vs 5.8x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 3.2% margin vs CANG's -5.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.76 vs CANG's 2.25 | |
| Dividends | Tie | Neither stock pays a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | -37.6% vs CANG's -72.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 4.2% ROA vs CANG's -2.3%, ROIC 6.4% vs 4.6% |
TKLF vs CANG — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
TKLF vs CANG — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TKLF leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CANG is the larger business by revenue, generating $3.5B annually — 8.9x TKLF's $390M. TKLF is the more profitable business, keeping 3.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CANG's -5.2%. On growth, TKLF holds the edge at +256.9% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $390M | $3.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $1.2B | $333M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $1.0B | -$178M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$237M | $0 |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +11.4% | +13.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +2.3% | +7.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +3.2% | -5.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -0.7% | -154.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +256.9% | +58.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +2135.4% | +3.6% |
Valuation Metrics
TKLF leads this category, winning 3 of 4 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 0.0x trailing earnings, TKLF trades at a 100% valuation discount to CANG's 5.8x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, CANG's 3.3x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than TKLF's 8.6x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $886,624 | $254M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $10.0B | $90M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 0.00x | 5.76x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.00x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 8.63x | 3.30x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.00x | 2.15x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.00x | 0.42x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
TKLF leads this category, winning 5 of 8 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
TKLF delivers a 15.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $16 in annual profit, vs $-4 for CANG. CANG carries lower financial leverage with a 0.04x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to TKLF's 1.66x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +15.5% | -4.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +4.2% | -2.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +6.4% | +4.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +8.4% | +4.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.66x | 0.04x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $10.0B | -$1.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $721M | $1.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $10.7B | $170M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 3.77x | -1.87x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CANG leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CANG five years ago would be worth $8,608 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $71 for TKLF. Over the past 12 months, TKLF leads with a -37.6% total return vs CANG's -72.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CANG at 0.9% vs TKLF's -46.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -31.1% | -61.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -37.6% | -72.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -84.5% | +2.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.3% | -13.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.3% | -44.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -46.3% | +0.9% |
Risk & Volatility
TKLF leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
TKLF is the less volatile stock with a 0.76 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CANG's 2.25 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. TKLF currently trades 48.6% from its 52-week high vs CANG's 18.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.76x | 2.25x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $4.32 | $2.88 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.95 | $0.33 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +48.6% | +18.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 42.3 | 50.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 32K | 1.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $3.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 2 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 5 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +5.3% |
TKLF leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). CANG leads in 1 (Total Returns).
TKLF vs CANG: Frequently Asked Questions
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TKLF or CANG a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Tokyo Lifestyle Co.
, Ltd. (TKLF) is the stronger pick with 159. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -52. 7% for Cango Inc. (CANG). Tokyo Lifestyle Co. , Ltd. (TKLF) offers the better valuation at 0. 0x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Cango Inc. (CANG) a "Buy" — based on 2 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 — TKLF or CANG?
On trailing P/E, Tokyo Lifestyle Co.
, Ltd. (TKLF) is the cheapest at 0. 0x versus Cango Inc. at 5. 8x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TKLF or CANG?
Over the past 5 years, Cango Inc.
(CANG) delivered a total return of -13. 9%, compared to -99. 3% for Tokyo Lifestyle Co. , Ltd. (TKLF). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CANG returned -44. 7% versus TKLF's -99. 3%. 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 — TKLF or CANG?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Tokyo Lifestyle Co.
, Ltd. (TKLF) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 76β versus Cango Inc. 's 2. 25β — meaning CANG is approximately 195% more volatile than TKLF relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Cango Inc. (CANG) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 4% versus 166% for Tokyo Lifestyle Co. , Ltd. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — TKLF or CANG?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Tokyo Lifestyle Co.
, Ltd. (TKLF) is pulling ahead at 159. 7% versus -52. 7% for Cango Inc. (CANG). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Tokyo Lifestyle Co. , Ltd. grew EPS 152. 2% year-over-year, compared to 960. 0% for Cango Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, TKLF leads at 411. 6% 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 — TKLF or CANG?
Cango Inc.
(CANG) is the more profitable company, earning 37. 3% net margin versus 3. 2% for Tokyo Lifestyle Co. , Ltd. — meaning it keeps 37. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CANG leads at 22. 2% versus 2. 2% for TKLF. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CANG leads at 55. 3%, 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.
07Which pays a better dividend — TKLF or CANG?
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.
08Is TKLF or CANG better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Tokyo Lifestyle Co.
, Ltd. (TKLF) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 76)). Cango Inc. (CANG) carries a higher beta of 2. 25 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (TKLF: -99. 3%, CANG: -44. 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.
09What are the main differences between TKLF and CANG?
These companies operate in different sectors (TKLF (Consumer Defensive) and CANG (Consumer Cyclical)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: TKLF is a small-cap high-growth stock; CANG 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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.