XP vs SCHW vs MS vs RJF vs GS

For growth investors, XP Inc.

(XP) is the stronger pick with 34. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 9% for The Charles Schwab Corporation (SCHW). XP Inc. (XP) offers the better valuation at 11. 5x trailing P/E (1. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate XP Inc. (XP) a "Buy" — based on 9 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.

On trailing P/E, XP Inc.

(XP) is the cheapest at 11. 5x versus The Charles Schwab Corporation at 29. 6x. On forward P/E, XP Inc. is actually cheaper at 1. 7x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: XP Inc. wins at 0. 06x versus The Charles Schwab Corporation's 6. 42x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.

(GS) delivered a total return of +168. 9%, compared to -50. 0% for XP Inc. (XP). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MS returned +743. 3% versus XP's -38. 1%. 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), The Charles Schwab Corporation (SCHW) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

71β versus XP Inc. 's 1. 68β — meaning XP is approximately 137% more volatile than SCHW relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Raymond James Financial, Inc. (RJF) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 36% versus 6% for XP Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

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

(XP) is pulling ahead at 34. 1% versus 1. 9% for The Charles Schwab Corporation (SCHW). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. grew EPS 77. 3% year-over-year, compared to 6. 2% for Raymond James 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.

The Charles Schwab Corporation (SCHW) is the more profitable company, earning 22.

9% net margin versus 11. 3% for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. — meaning it keeps 22. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: SCHW leads at 29. 6% versus -19. 7% for XP. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — RJF leads at 88. 2%, 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.

The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.

By this metric, XP Inc. (XP) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 06x versus The Charles Schwab Corporation's 6. 42x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, XP Inc. (XP) trades at 1. 7x forward P/E versus 16. 2x for Morgan Stanley — 14. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for SCHW: 34. 4% to $119. 11.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

XP Inc. (XP) offers the highest yield at 3. 9%, versus 1. 3% for Raymond James Financial, Inc. (RJF).

For long-horizon retirement investors, The Charles Schwab Corporation (SCHW) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

71), 1. 4% yield, +253. 1% 10Y return). XP Inc. (XP) carries a higher beta of 1. 68 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (SCHW: +253. 1%, XP: -38. 1%), 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 Financial Services sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

In terms of investment character: XP is a small-cap high-growth stock; SCHW is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; MS is a large-cap high-growth stock; RJF is a mid-cap deep-value stock; GS is a large-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.