Financial - Conglomerates
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
TREE vs EFC vs PFSI vs RKT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
REIT - Mortgage
Financial - Mortgages
Financial - Mortgages
TREE vs EFC vs PFSI vs RKT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Financial - Conglomerates | REIT - Mortgage | Financial - Mortgages | Financial - Mortgages |
| Market Cap | $563M | $1.30B | $4.56B | $1.99B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.12B | $429M | $4.36B | $5.40B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $181M | $147M | $507M | $-102M |
| Gross Margin | 94.3% | 88.6% | 91.4% | 91.3% |
| Operating Margin | 7.3% | 63.0% | 34.6% | 12.4% |
| Forward P/E | 7.2x | 7.2x | 7.1x | 19.2x |
| Total Debt | $435M | $16.96B | $23.06B | $13.98B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $81M | $202M | $302M | $1.27B |
TREE vs EFC vs PFSI vs RKT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Aug 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| LendingTree, Inc. (TREE) | 100 | 13.1 | -86.9% |
| Ellington Financial… (EFC) | 100 | 105.1 | +5.1% |
| PennyMac Financial … (PFSI) | 100 | 165.9 | +65.9% |
| Rocket Companies, I… (RKT) | 100 | 50.3 | -49.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TREE vs EFC vs PFSI vs RKT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TREE is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.55, current ratio 1.75x
- 21.8% ROA vs RKT's -0.3%, ROIC 9.0% vs 2.5%
EFC carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.47, yield 14.1%
- Beta 0.47, yield 14.1%, current ratio 0.08x
- 34.2% margin vs RKT's 0.5%
- Beta 0.47 vs RKT's 1.77
PFSI is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 173.8%, EPS growth 59.2%
- 6.0% 10Y total return vs EFC's 75.7%
- 173.8% NII/revenue growth vs TREE's 24.1%
- Lower P/E (7.1x vs 7.2x)
RKT is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +18.2% vs PFSI's -9.2%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 173.8% NII/revenue growth vs TREE's 24.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.1x vs 7.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 34.2% margin vs RKT's 0.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.47 vs RKT's 1.77 | |
| Dividends | 14.1% yield, vs PFSI's 1.3%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +18.2% vs PFSI's -9.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 21.8% ROA vs RKT's -0.3%, ROIC 9.0% vs 2.5% |
TREE vs EFC vs PFSI vs RKT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
TREE vs EFC vs PFSI vs RKT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
EFC leads in 2 of 6 categories
TREE leads 1 • PFSI leads 0 • RKT leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
EFC leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
RKT is the larger business by revenue, generating $5.4B annually — 12.6x EFC's $429M. EFC is the more profitable business, keeping 34.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to RKT's 0.5%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.1B | $429M | $4.4B | $5.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $120M | $301M | $1.0B | $682M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $181M | $147M | $507M | -$102M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $73M | $0 | -$3.8B | -$1.1B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +94.3% | +88.6% | +91.4% | +91.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +7.3% | +63.0% | +34.6% | +12.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +13.5% | +34.2% | +11.5% | +0.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +5.4% | +75.5% | -32.4% | -63.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +123.0% | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +2.3% | -44.0% | +7.7% | -4.3% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — TREE and RKT each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 3.8x trailing earnings, TREE trades at a 94% valuation discount to RKT's 67.1x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, TREE's 8.8x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than EFC's 39.3x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $563M | $1.3B | $4.6B | $2.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $917M | $18.1B | $27.3B | $14.7B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 3.77x | 11.01x | 9.41x | 67.10x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 7.25x | 7.20x | 7.08x | 19.25x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.44x | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 8.84x | 39.35x | 18.07x | 18.81x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.50x | 1.93x | 1.05x | 0.37x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.99x | 0.70x | 1.09x | 0.22x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 9.28x | 2.56x | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
TREE leads this category, winning 9 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
TREE delivers a 86.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $86 in annual profit, vs $-1 for RKT. TREE carries lower financial leverage with a 1.52x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to EFC's 9.07x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), TREE scores 6/9 vs PFSI's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +86.0% | +8.4% | +12.0% | -1.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +21.8% | +0.8% | +1.8% | -0.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +9.0% | +3.1% | +4.4% | +2.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +13.2% | +2.7% | +10.4% | +4.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.52x | 9.07x | 5.35x | 1.55x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $354M | $16.8B | $22.8B | $12.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $81M | $202M | $302M | $1.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $435M | $17.0B | $23.1B | $14.0B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 4.45x | 1.51x | 0.96x | 0.87x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — TREE and PFSI each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in PFSI five years ago would be worth $15,353 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,103 for TREE. Over the past 12 months, RKT leads with a +18.2% total return vs PFSI's -9.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors TREE at 29.6% vs EFC's 14.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -21.1% | -0.4% | -33.3% | -29.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +2.7% | +13.6% | -9.2% | +18.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +117.8% | +49.2% | +54.9% | +76.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -79.0% | +21.2% | +53.5% | -30.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -48.9% | +75.7% | +598.9% | -20.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +29.6% | +14.3% | +15.7% | +20.8% |
Risk & Volatility
EFC leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
EFC is the less volatile stock with a 0.47 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than RKT's 1.77 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. EFC currently trades 92.8% from its 52-week high vs TREE's 52.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.55x | 0.47x | 0.93x | 1.77x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $77.35 | $14.12 | $160.36 | $24.36 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $32.65 | $11.28 | $82.67 | $11.08 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +52.5% | +92.8% | +54.6% | +57.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 36.5 | 57.8 | 47.2 | 38.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 341K | 1.6M | 601K | 25.2M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — EFC and PFSI each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: TREE as "Buy", EFC as "Buy", PFSI as "Buy", RKT as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 69.9% upside for TREE (target: $69) vs 3.1% for EFC (target: $14). For income investors, EFC offers the higher dividend yield at 14.10% vs PFSI's 1.33%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $69.00 | $13.50 | $143.00 | $21.63 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 23 | 13 | 20 | 25 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +14.1% | +1.3% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $1.85 | $1.16 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.1% | 0.0% |
EFC leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Risk & Volatility). TREE leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
TREE vs EFC vs PFSI vs RKT: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TREE or EFC or PFSI or RKT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, PennyMac Financial Services, Inc.
(PFSI) is the stronger pick with 173. 8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 24. 1% for LendingTree, Inc. (TREE). LendingTree, Inc. (TREE) offers the better valuation at 3. 8x trailing P/E (7. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate LendingTree, Inc. (TREE) a "Buy" — based on 23 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 — TREE or EFC or PFSI or RKT?
On trailing P/E, LendingTree, Inc.
(TREE) is the cheapest at 3. 8x versus Rocket Companies, Inc. at 67. 1x. On forward P/E, PennyMac Financial Services, Inc. is actually cheaper at 7. 1x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TREE or EFC or PFSI or RKT?
Over the past 5 years, PennyMac Financial Services, Inc.
(PFSI) delivered a total return of +53. 5%, compared to -79. 0% for LendingTree, Inc. (TREE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: PFSI returned +598. 9% versus TREE's -48. 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 — TREE or EFC or PFSI or RKT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Ellington Financial Inc.
(EFC) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 47β versus Rocket Companies, Inc. 's 1. 77β — meaning RKT is approximately 278% more volatile than EFC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, LendingTree, Inc. (TREE) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 152% versus 9% for Ellington Financial Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — TREE or EFC or PFSI or RKT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), PennyMac Financial Services, Inc.
(PFSI) is pulling ahead at 173. 8% versus 24. 1% for LendingTree, Inc. (TREE). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: LendingTree, Inc. grew EPS 443. 3% year-over-year, compared to -12. 5% for Ellington Financial Inc.. 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 — TREE or EFC or PFSI or RKT?
Ellington Financial Inc.
(EFC) is the more profitable company, earning 21. 8% net margin versus 0. 5% for Rocket Companies, Inc. — meaning it keeps 21. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: EFC leads at 61. 6% versus 7. 3% for TREE. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — TREE leads at 94. 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.
07Is TREE or EFC or PFSI or RKT more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, PennyMac Financial Services, Inc.
(PFSI) trades at 7. 1x forward P/E versus 19. 2x for Rocket Companies, Inc. — 12. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for TREE: 69. 9% to $69. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — TREE or EFC or PFSI or RKT?
In this comparison, EFC (14.
1% yield), PFSI (1. 3% yield) pay a dividend. TREE, RKT do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is TREE or EFC or PFSI or RKT better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Ellington Financial Inc.
(EFC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 47), 14. 1% yield). Rocket Companies, Inc. (RKT) carries a higher beta of 1. 77 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (EFC: +75. 7%, RKT: -20. 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 TREE and EFC and PFSI and RKT?
These companies operate in different sectors (TREE (Financial Services) and EFC (Real Estate) and PFSI (Financial Services) and RKT (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
EFC, PFSI pay a dividend while TREE, RKT 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.