Auto - Dealerships
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
UCAR vs TSLA vs NIO vs BLNK
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Auto - Manufacturers
Auto - Manufacturers
Engineering & Construction
UCAR vs TSLA vs NIO vs BLNK — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Auto - Dealerships | Auto - Manufacturers | Auto - Manufacturers | Engineering & Construction |
| Market Cap | $69K | $1.55T | $12.28B | $91M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $80M | $97.88B | $69.42B | $106M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-86M | $3.88B | $-24.31B | $-126M |
| Gross Margin | 25.0% | 19.1% | 10.3% | 26.0% |
| Operating Margin | -112.7% | 5.0% | -32.6% | -119.5% |
| Forward P/E | — | 213.0x | — | — |
| Total Debt | $32M | $8.38B | $33.82B | $11M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $23M | $16.51B | $19.33B | $42M |
UCAR vs TSLA vs NIO vs BLNK — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Apr 23 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| U Power Limited (UCAR) | 100 | 0.0 | -100.0% |
| Tesla, Inc. (TSLA) | 100 | 250.6 | +150.6% |
| NIO Inc. (NIO) | 100 | 74.6 | -25.4% |
| Blink Charging Co. (BLNK) | 100 | 11.1 | -88.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: UCAR vs TSLA vs NIO vs BLNK
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
UCAR carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- beta 0.87
- Rev growth 124.1%, EPS growth -7.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 76.8%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.87, Low D/E 10.1%, current ratio 1.85x
- Beta 0.87, current ratio 1.85x
TSLA is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 28.6% 10Y total return vs NIO's -11.1%
- 4.0% margin vs BLNK's -118.7%
- 2.9% ROA vs BLNK's -66.7%, ROIC 4.5% vs -109.7%
NIO is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +52.9% vs UCAR's -94.7%
BLNK lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 124.1% revenue growth vs BLNK's -11.2% | |
| Quality / Margins | 4.0% margin vs BLNK's -118.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.87 vs BLNK's 2.96 | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 4 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +52.9% vs UCAR's -94.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 2.9% ROA vs BLNK's -66.7%, ROIC 4.5% vs -109.7% |
UCAR vs TSLA vs NIO vs BLNK — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
UCAR vs TSLA vs NIO vs BLNK — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
TSLA leads in 3 of 6 categories
UCAR leads 1 • NIO leads 0 • BLNK leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TSLA leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TSLA is the larger business by revenue, generating $97.9B annually — 1229.6x UCAR's $80M. TSLA is the more profitable business, keeping 4.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BLNK's -118.7%. On growth, UCAR holds the edge at +33.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $80M | $97.9B | $69.4B | $106M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$78M | $9.5B | -$23.0B | -$115M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$86M | $3.9B | -$24.3B | -$126M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$109M | $7.0B | -$16.5B | -$47M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +25.0% | +19.1% | +10.3% | +26.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -112.7% | +5.0% | -32.6% | -119.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -107.6% | +4.0% | -35.0% | -118.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -137.5% | +7.2% | -23.8% | -44.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +33.5% | +15.8% | +9.0% | +11.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +73.8% | +11.9% | +7.6% | +99.9% |
Valuation Metrics
UCAR leads this category, winning 2 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $68,950 | $1.55T | $12.3B | $91M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1M | $1.54T | $14.4B | $60M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.01x | 381.31x | -3.62x | -0.40x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 212.96x | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 9.84x | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 146.35x | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.01x | 16.30x | 1.27x | 0.73x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.00x | 17.53x | 6.08x | 0.67x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 248.44x | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
TSLA leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
TSLA delivers a 4.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $5 in annual profit, vs $-3 for NIO. BLNK carries lower financial leverage with a 0.09x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NIO's 2.50x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), TSLA scores 6/9 vs UCAR's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -25.6% | +4.8% | -2.7% | -131.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -21.0% | +2.9% | -23.7% | -66.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -12.1% | +4.5% | -55.2% | -109.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -17.0% | +4.4% | -41.7% | -77.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 6 | 3 | 3 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.10x | 0.10x | 2.50x | 0.09x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $9M | -$8.1B | $14.5B | -$31M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $23M | $16.5B | $19.3B | $42M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $32M | $8.4B | $33.8B | $11M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -19.96x | 17.04x | -25.29x | -9064.60x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
TSLA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in TSLA five years ago would be worth $18,375 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $0 for UCAR. Over the past 12 months, NIO leads with a +52.9% total return vs UCAR's -94.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors TSLA at 33.8% vs UCAR's -92.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -89.2% | -6.0% | +14.2% | +7.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -94.7% | +49.1% | +52.9% | +4.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | +139.7% | -29.0% | -88.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | +83.7% | -84.1% | -97.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | +2856.3% | -11.1% | -97.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -92.6% | +33.8% | -10.8% | -51.9% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — UCAR and TSLA each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
UCAR is the less volatile stock with a 0.87 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than BLNK's 2.96 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. TSLA currently trades 82.6% from its 52-week high vs UCAR's 3.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.87x | 2.06x | 1.29x | 2.96x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $49.80 | $498.83 | $8.02 | $2.65 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.42 | $271.00 | $3.34 | $0.45 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +3.1% | +82.6% | +73.2% | +29.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 40.4 | 59.3 | 44.3 | 66.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 16.4M | 61.6M | 39.7M | 2.1M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: TSLA as "Hold", NIO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 220.5% upside for UCAR (target: $5) vs 9.4% for TSLA (target: $450).
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Buy | — |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $5.00 | $450.45 | $6.45 | — |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 81 | 24 | — |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
TSLA leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). UCAR leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
UCAR vs TSLA vs NIO vs BLNK: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is UCAR or TSLA or NIO or BLNK a better buy right now?
For growth investors, U Power Limited (UCAR) is the stronger pick with 124.
1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -11. 2% for Blink Charging Co. (BLNK). Tesla, Inc. (TSLA) offers the better valuation at 381. 3x trailing P/E (213. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate NIO Inc. (NIO) a "Buy" — based on 24 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 is the better long-term investment — UCAR or TSLA or NIO or BLNK?
Over the past 5 years, Tesla, Inc.
(TSLA) delivered a total return of +83. 7%, compared to -100. 0% for U Power Limited (UCAR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: TSLA returned +28. 6% versus UCAR'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.
03Which is safer — UCAR or TSLA or NIO or BLNK?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), U Power Limited (UCAR) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
87β versus Blink Charging Co. 's 2. 96β — meaning BLNK is approximately 240% more volatile than UCAR relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Blink Charging Co. (BLNK) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 9% versus 3% for NIO Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — UCAR or TSLA or NIO or BLNK?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), U Power Limited (UCAR) is pulling ahead at 124.
1% versus -11. 2% for Blink Charging Co. (BLNK). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Blink Charging Co. grew EPS 38. 9% year-over-year, compared to -47. 0% for Tesla, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, BLNK leads at 82. 3% 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.
05Which has better profit margins — UCAR or TSLA or NIO or BLNK?
Tesla, Inc.
(TSLA) is the more profitable company, earning 4. 0% net margin versus -159. 2% for Blink Charging Co. — meaning it keeps 4. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: TSLA leads at 4. 6% versus -160. 6% for BLNK. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BLNK leads at 31. 4%, 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.
06Is UCAR or TSLA or NIO or BLNK more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for UCAR: 220.
5% to $5. 00.
07Which pays a better dividend — UCAR or TSLA or NIO or BLNK?
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 UCAR or TSLA or NIO or BLNK better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, U Power Limited (UCAR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
87)). Blink Charging Co. (BLNK) carries a higher beta of 2. 96 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (UCAR: -100. 0%, BLNK: -97. 5%), 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 UCAR and TSLA and NIO and BLNK?
These companies operate in different sectors (UCAR (Consumer Cyclical) and TSLA (Consumer Cyclical) and NIO (Consumer Cyclical) and BLNK (Industrials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: UCAR is a small-cap high-growth stock; TSLA is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; NIO is a mid-cap high-growth stock; BLNK is a small-cap quality compounder 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 all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.