UBXG vs BTBT vs MARA vs CLPS vs RIOT

For growth investors, Bit Digital, Inc.

(BTBT) is the stronger pick with 264. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -45. 3% for U-BX Technology Ltd. (UBXG). Bit Digital, Inc. (BTBT) offers the better valuation at 9. 2x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Bit Digital, Inc. (BTBT) 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.

Over the past 5 years, Riot Platforms, Inc.

(RIOT) delivered a total return of -27. 8%, compared to -99. 4% for U-BX Technology Ltd. (UBXG). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: RIOT returned +787. 3% versus UBXG's -99. 4%. 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), U-BX Technology Ltd.

(UBXG) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 07β versus Riot Platforms, Inc. 's 3. 87β — meaning RIOT is approximately 5204% more volatile than UBXG relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Bit Digital, Inc. (BTBT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 3% versus 105% for Marathon Digital Holdings, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Bit Digital, Inc.

(BTBT) is pulling ahead at 264. 6% versus -45. 3% for U-BX Technology Ltd. (UBXG). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Bit Digital, Inc. grew EPS 225. 0% year-over-year, compared to -673. 5% for Riot Platforms, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CLPS leads at 2. 7% 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.

Bit Digital, Inc.

(BTBT) is the more profitable company, earning 17. 3% net margin versus -144. 6% for Marathon Digital Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 17. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: BTBT leads at 16. 8% versus -90. 6% for MARA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BTBT leads at 61. 9%, 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.

In this comparison, CLPS (14.

6% yield), BTBT (0. 3% yield) pay a dividend. UBXG, MARA, RIOT 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). Bit Digital, Inc. (BTBT) carries a higher beta of 3. 37 — 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%, BTBT: -60. 4%), 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 (UBXG (Technology) and BTBT (Financial Services) and MARA (Financial Services) and CLPS (Technology) and RIOT (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

In terms of investment character: UBXG is a small-cap quality compounder stock; BTBT is a small-cap high-growth stock; MARA is a small-cap high-growth stock; CLPS is a small-cap high-growth stock; RIOT is a small-cap high-growth stock. CLPS pays a dividend while UBXG, BTBT, MARA, RIOT 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.