Leisure
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
ESCA vs AMZN vs MSFT vs SPWH vs AAPL vs KO vs JPM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Specialty Retail
Software - Infrastructure
Specialty Retail
Consumer Electronics
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Banks - Diversified
ESCA vs AMZN vs MSFT vs SPWH vs AAPL vs KO vs JPM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Leisure | Specialty Retail | Software - Infrastructure | Specialty Retail | Consumer Electronics | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Banks - Diversified |
| Market Cap | $256M | $2.57T | $2.90T | $48M | $4.27T | $355.61B | $896.00B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $240M | $742.78B | $318.27B | $1.22B | $451.44B | $49.28B | $280.33B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $15M | $90.80B | $125.22B | $-51M | $122.58B | $13.70B | $57.05B |
| Gross Margin | 27.1% | 50.6% | 68.3% | 30.0% | 47.9% | 61.7% | 60.0% |
| Operating Margin | 8.7% | 11.5% | 46.8% | -1.1% | 32.6% | 29.3% | 25.9% |
| Forward P/E | 17.3x | 27.1x | 23.3x | — | 33.3x | 25.3x | 14.4x |
| Total Debt | $20M | $152.99B | $112.18B | $427M | $112.38B | $45.49B | $942.38B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $12M | $86.81B | $30.24B | $2M | $35.93B | $10.27B | $343.34B |
ESCA vs AMZN vs MSFT vs SPWH vs AAPL vs KO vs JPM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Escalade, Incorpora… (ESCA) | 100 | 133.5 | +33.5% |
| Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) | 100 | 172.9 | +72.9% |
| Microsoft Corporati… (MSFT) | 100 | 192.0 | +92.0% |
| Sportsman's Warehou… (SPWH) | 100 | 8.6 | -91.4% |
| Apple Inc. (AAPL) | 100 | 319.2 | +219.2% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 184.9 | +84.9% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 341.0 | +241.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ESCA vs AMZN vs MSFT vs SPWH vs AAPL vs KO vs JPM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ESCA ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.87, yield 3.2%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.87, Low D/E 11.4%, current ratio 4.28x
- Beta 0.87, yield 3.2%, current ratio 4.28x
- 3.2% yield, vs KO's 2.5%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
AMZN is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 12.4%, EPS growth 29.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 11.7%
MSFT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth and quality.
- 14.9% revenue growth vs ESCA's -4.5%
- 39.3% margin vs SPWH's -4.2%
- Beta 0.84 vs SPWH's 1.62, lower leverage
SPWH doesn't hold a clear category lead here; it's more of a secondary option in this specific comparison.
AAPL is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 11.3% 10Y total return vs MSFT's 7.3%
- +46.7% vs SPWH's -70.1%
- 34.0% ROA vs SPWH's -5.9%, ROIC 67.4% vs -1.6%
In this particular matchup, KO is outpaced on most metrics by others in the set.
JPM is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.81 vs KO's 2.26
- Lower P/E (14.4x vs 25.3x), PEG 0.81 vs 2.26
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 14.9% revenue growth vs ESCA's -4.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (14.4x vs 25.3x), PEG 0.81 vs 2.26 | |
| Quality / Margins | 39.3% margin vs SPWH's -4.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.84 vs SPWH's 1.62, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.2% yield, vs KO's 2.5%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +46.7% vs SPWH's -70.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 34.0% ROA vs SPWH's -5.9%, ROIC 67.4% vs -1.6% |
ESCA vs AMZN vs MSFT vs SPWH vs AAPL vs KO vs JPM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
ESCA vs AMZN vs MSFT vs SPWH vs AAPL vs KO vs JPM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 7 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
AAPL leads in 2 of 6 categories
MSFT leads 1 • SPWH leads 1 • KO leads 1 • ESCA leads 0 • AMZN leads 0 • JPM leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MSFT leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AMZN is the larger business by revenue, generating $742.8B annually — 3088.9x ESCA's $240M. MSFT is the more profitable business, keeping 39.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to SPWH's -4.2%. On growth, MSFT holds the edge at +18.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $240M | $742.8B | $318.3B | $1.2B | $451.4B | $49.3B | $280.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $25M | $155.9B | $192.6B | $25M | $160.0B | $15.5B | $81.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $15M | $90.8B | $125.2B | -$51M | $122.6B | $13.7B | $57.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $31M | -$2.5B | $72.9B | $13M | $129.2B | $12.6B | $100.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +27.1% | +50.6% | +68.3% | +30.0% | +47.9% | +61.7% | +60.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +8.7% | +11.5% | +46.8% | -1.1% | +32.6% | +29.3% | +25.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +6.4% | +12.2% | +39.3% | -4.2% | +27.2% | +27.8% | +20.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +12.7% | -0.3% | +22.9% | +1.1% | +28.6% | +25.5% | +36.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +0.6% | +16.6% | +18.3% | +2.8% | +16.6% | +12.1% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +63.2% | +74.8% | +23.4% | 0.0% | +21.8% | +18.2% | +16.0% |
Valuation Metrics
SPWH leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 16.0x trailing earnings, JPM trades at a 59% valuation discount to AAPL's 39.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), JPM offers better value at 0.90x vs KO's 2.43x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $256M | $2.57T | $2.90T | $48M | $4.27T | $355.6B | $896.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $264M | $2.63T | $2.98T | $473M | $4.35T | $390.8B | $1.50T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 18.82x | 33.27x | 28.65x | -0.95x | 39.03x | 27.18x | 16.00x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 17.25x | 27.13x | 23.25x | — | 33.26x | 25.27x | 14.40x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.19x | 1.52x | — | 2.18x | 2.43x | 0.90x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 11.11x | 18.06x | 18.35x | 18.80x | 30.06x | 26.39x | 18.36x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.07x | 3.58x | 10.30x | 0.04x | 10.27x | 7.42x | 3.20x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.49x | 6.28x | 8.49x | 0.25x | 59.25x | 10.40x | 2.47x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 9.00x | 333.39x | 40.53x | 5.40x | 43.27x | 67.15x | 8.88x |
Profitability & Efficiency
AAPL leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
AAPL delivers a 146.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $147 in annual profit, vs $-26 for SPWH. ESCA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.11x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to JPM's 2.60x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ESCA scores 8/9 vs SPWH's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +9.0% | +23.3% | +33.1% | -26.2% | +146.7% | +41.1% | +15.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +6.9% | +11.5% | +19.2% | -5.9% | +34.0% | +13.1% | +1.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.5% | +14.7% | +24.9% | -1.6% | +67.4% | +15.8% | +4.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +9.8% | +15.3% | +29.7% | -2.6% | +69.6% | +17.3% | +8.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 8 | 7 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.11x | 0.37x | 0.33x | 2.26x | 1.52x | 1.33x | 2.60x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $8M | $66.2B | $81.9B | $425M | $76.4B | $35.2B | $599.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $12M | $86.8B | $30.2B | $2M | $35.9B | $10.3B | $343.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $20M | $153.0B | $112.2B | $427M | $112.4B | $45.5B | $942.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 37.31x | 39.96x | 55.65x | -2.69x | — | 10.70x | 0.74x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
AAPL leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in AAPL five years ago would be worth $22,684 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $688 for SPWH. Over the past 12 months, AAPL leads with a +46.7% total return vs SPWH's -70.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors JPM at 33.6% vs SPWH's -37.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +38.3% | +5.3% | -17.0% | -15.8% | +7.6% | +20.3% | -0.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +33.2% | +11.9% | -17.7% | -70.1% | +46.7% | +17.2% | +21.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +49.9% | +88.5% | +20.7% | -74.9% | +60.1% | +47.0% | +138.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -8.6% | +41.0% | +56.0% | -93.1% | +126.8% | +65.6% | +118.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +136.9% | +567.1% | +727.4% | -84.7% | +1130.8% | +121.1% | +465.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +14.4% | +23.5% | +6.5% | -37.0% | +17.0% | +13.7% | +33.6% |
Risk & Volatility
KO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
KO is the less volatile stock with a -0.20 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than SPWH's 1.62 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. KO currently trades 98.3% from its 52-week high vs SPWH's 28.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.87x | 1.43x | 0.84x | 1.62x | 0.89x | -0.20x | 0.94x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $21.32 | $278.56 | $555.45 | $4.33 | $317.40 | $84.04 | $337.25 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $11.41 | $197.28 | $356.28 | $1.08 | $195.07 | $65.35 | $262.71 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +87.4% | +85.6% | +70.3% | +28.4% | +91.7% | +98.3% | +95.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 50.5 | 36.8 | 36.8 | 43.0 | 48.1 | 60.6 | 59.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 35K | 42.9M | 33.7M | 796K | 43.7M | 12.7M | 7.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — ESCA and KO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ESCA as "Buy", AMZN as "Buy", MSFT as "Buy", AAPL as "Buy", KO as "Buy", JPM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 41.3% upside for MSFT (target: $552) vs 4.2% for KO (target: $86). For income investors, ESCA offers the higher dividend yield at 3.21% vs AAPL's 0.35%.
| Metric | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | — | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $307.77 | $551.96 | — | $326.47 | $86.13 | $339.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 5 | 94 | 82 | — | 110 | 48 | 61 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +3.2% | — | +0.8% | — | +0.4% | +2.5% | +1.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | — | 21 | 0 | 13 | 56 | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.60 | — | $3.23 | — | $1.03 | $2.04 | $5.95 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.2% | 0.0% | +0.6% | +0.4% | +2.1% | +0.2% | +3.9% |
AAPL leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). MSFT leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 1 tied.
ESCA vs AMZN vs MSFT vs SPWH vs AAPL vs KO vs JPM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ESCA or AMZN or MSFT or SPWH or AAPL or KO or JPM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the stronger pick with 14.
9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -4. 5% for Escalade, Incorporated (ESCA). JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) offers the better valuation at 16. 0x trailing P/E (14. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Escalade, Incorporated (ESCA) a "Buy" — based on 5 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 — ESCA or AMZN or MSFT or SPWH or AAPL or KO or JPM?
On trailing P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the cheapest at 16. 0x versus Apple Inc. at 39. 0x. On forward P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co. is actually cheaper at 14. 4x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: JPMorgan Chase & Co. wins at 0. 81x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 26x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ESCA or AMZN or MSFT or SPWH or AAPL or KO or JPM?
Over the past 5 years, Apple Inc.
(AAPL) delivered a total return of +126. 8%, compared to -93. 1% for Sportsman's Warehouse Holdings, Inc. (SPWH). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AAPL returned +1131% versus SPWH's -84. 7%. 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 — ESCA or AMZN or MSFT or SPWH or AAPL or KO or JPM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
20β versus Sportsman's Warehouse Holdings, Inc. 's 1. 62β — meaning SPWH is approximately -911% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Escalade, Incorporated (ESCA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 11% versus 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ESCA or AMZN or MSFT or SPWH or AAPL or KO or JPM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is pulling ahead at 14.
9% versus -4. 5% for Escalade, Incorporated (ESCA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Amazon. com, Inc. grew EPS 29. 7% year-over-year, compared to -49. 4% for Sportsman's Warehouse Holdings, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, MSFT leads at 12. 4% 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.
06Which has better profit margins — ESCA or AMZN or MSFT or SPWH or AAPL or KO or JPM?
Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the more profitable company, earning 36.
1% net margin versus -4. 1% for Sportsman's Warehouse Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 36. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MSFT leads at 45. 6% versus -1. 2% for SPWH. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MSFT leads at 68. 8%, 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 ESCA or AMZN or MSFT or SPWH or AAPL or KO or JPM more undervalued right now?
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, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 81x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 26x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) trades at 14. 4x forward P/E versus 33. 3x for Apple Inc. — 18. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MSFT: 41. 3% to $551. 96.
08Which pays a better dividend — ESCA or AMZN or MSFT or SPWH or AAPL or KO or JPM?
In this comparison, ESCA (3.
2% yield), KO (2. 5% yield), JPM (1. 9% yield), MSFT (0. 8% yield), AAPL (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. AMZN, SPWH do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is ESCA or AMZN or MSFT or SPWH or AAPL or KO or JPM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
20), 2. 5% yield, +121. 1% 10Y return). Sportsman's Warehouse Holdings, Inc. (SPWH) carries a higher beta of 1. 62 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (KO: +121. 1%, SPWH: -84. 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.
10What are the main differences between ESCA and AMZN and MSFT and SPWH and AAPL and KO and JPM?
These companies operate in different sectors (ESCA (Consumer Cyclical) and AMZN (Consumer Cyclical) and MSFT (Technology) and SPWH (Consumer Cyclical) and AAPL (Technology) and KO (Consumer Defensive) and JPM (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: ESCA is a small-cap income-oriented stock; AMZN is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; MSFT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; SPWH is a small-cap quality compounder stock; AAPL is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock. ESCA, MSFT, KO, JPM pay a dividend while AMZN, SPWH, AAPL 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.