UTSI vs CLFD

For growth investors, Clearfield, Inc.

(CLFD) is the stronger pick with 19. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -30. 9% for UTStarcom Holdings Corp. (UTSI). Analysts rate Clearfield, Inc. (CLFD) a "Buy" — based on 8 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, Clearfield, Inc.

(CLFD) delivered a total return of -4. 1%, compared to -50. 4% for UTStarcom Holdings Corp. (UTSI). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CLFD returned +106. 7% versus UTSI's -69. 5%. 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), UTStarcom Holdings Corp.

(UTSI) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 20β versus Clearfield, Inc. 's 1. 79β — meaning CLFD is approximately 817% more volatile than UTSI relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Clearfield, Inc. (CLFD) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 3% versus 4% for UTStarcom Holdings Corp. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Clearfield, Inc.

(CLFD) is pulling ahead at 19. 6% versus -30. 9% for UTStarcom Holdings Corp. (UTSI). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Clearfield, Inc. grew EPS 31. 8% year-over-year, compared to -14. 3% for UTStarcom Holdings Corp.. Over a 3-year CAGR, UTSI leads at -11. 9% 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.

Clearfield, Inc.

(CLFD) is the more profitable company, earning -5. 4% net margin versus -40. 2% for UTStarcom Holdings Corp. — meaning it keeps -5. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CLFD leads at 1. 4% versus -67. 4% for UTSI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CLFD leads at 33. 7%, 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.

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.

For long-horizon retirement investors, UTStarcom Holdings Corp.

(UTSI) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 20)). Clearfield, Inc. (CLFD) carries a higher beta of 1. 79 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (UTSI: -69. 5%, CLFD: +106. 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.

Both stocks operate in the Technology sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

In terms of investment character: UTSI is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CLFD is a small-cap high-growth 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.