Shell Companies
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
HCMA vs MS vs KO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Capital Markets
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
HCMA vs MS vs KO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Shell Companies | Financial - Capital Markets | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $260M | $340.97B | $355.61B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $114.98B | $49.28B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $5M | $16.86B | $13.70B |
| Gross Margin | — | 57.1% | 61.7% |
| Operating Margin | — | 19.1% | 29.3% |
| Forward P/E | 0.0x | 18.0x | 25.3x |
| Total Debt | $0.00 | $475.56B | $45.49B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $792K | $111.69B | $10.27B |
HCMA vs MS vs KO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Mar 22 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| HCM Acquisition Corp (HCMA) | 100 | 102.9 | +2.9% |
| Morgan Stanley (MS) | 100 | 244.9 | +144.9% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 133.3 | +33.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: HCMA vs MS vs KO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
HCMA is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and bank quality.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.04, current ratio 0.76x
- NIM 1.4% vs MS's 0.7%
- Lower P/E (0.0x vs 25.3x)
MS is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 11.5%, EPS growth 28.3%
- 8.5% 10Y total return vs KO's 121.1%
- PEG 1.88 vs KO's 2.26
KO has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 56 yrs, beta -0.20, yield 2.5%
- Beta -0.20, yield 2.5%, current ratio 1.46x
- 27.8% margin vs HCMA's 1.4%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 11.5% NII/revenue growth vs KO's 1.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (0.0x vs 25.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs HCMA's 1.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.04 vs MS's 1.40 | |
| Dividends | 2.5% yield, 56-year raise streak, vs MS's 1.9%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +65.3% vs HCMA's +1.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.1% ROA vs MS's 1.2%, ROIC 15.8% vs 3.1% |
HCMA vs MS vs KO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
HCMA vs MS vs KO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 3 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MS and HCMA operate at a comparable scale, with $115.0B and $0 in trailing revenue. KO is the more profitable business, keeping 27.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to MS's 14.7%.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $115.0B | $49.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$6M | $26.6B | $15.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $5M | $16.9B | $13.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$1M | -$17.9B | $12.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +57.1% | +61.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | +19.1% | +29.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | +14.7% | +27.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | -15.6% | +25.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | +12.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -171.4% | +48.9% | +18.2% |
Valuation Metrics
MS leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 0.0x trailing earnings, HCMA trades at a 100% valuation discount to KO's 27.2x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), MS offers better value at 2.19x vs KO's 2.43x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $260M | $341.0B | $355.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $259M | $704.8B | $390.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 0.02x | 20.98x | 27.18x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 18.00x | 25.27x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.19x | 2.43x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 26.49x | 26.39x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 2.97x | 7.42x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.98x | 3.03x | 10.40x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 7.40x | 67.15x |
Profitability & Efficiency
KO leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
KO delivers a 41.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $41 in annual profit, vs $3 for HCMA. KO carries lower financial leverage with a 1.33x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MS's 4.22x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MS scores 7/9 vs HCMA's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +3.1% | +15.3% | +41.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +3.0% | +1.2% | +13.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -1.0% | +3.1% | +15.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -1.3% | +3.3% | +17.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 7 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 4.22x | 1.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$792,423 | $363.9B | $35.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $792,423 | $111.7B | $10.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $0 | $475.6B | $45.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 0.45x | 10.70x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MS leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MS five years ago would be worth $25,467 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $10,353 for HCMA. Over the past 12 months, MS leads with a +65.3% total return vs HCMA's +1.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MS at 37.1% vs HCMA's -1.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +1.9% | +18.8% | +20.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +1.9% | +65.3% | +17.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -5.4% | +157.5% | +47.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +3.5% | +154.7% | +65.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +3.5% | +854.4% | +121.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -1.8% | +37.1% | +13.7% |
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 MS's 1.40 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.04x | 1.40x | -0.20x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $10.49 | $219.16 | $84.04 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $10.03 | $128.81 | $65.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +97.8% | +97.7% | +98.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 65.6 | 62.2 | 60.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 42K | 4.5M | 12.7M |
Analyst Outlook
KO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: MS as "Buy", KO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 4.2% upside for KO (target: $86) vs -6.0% for MS (target: $201). For income investors, KO offers the higher dividend yield at 2.46% vs MS's 1.93%.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $201.25 | $86.13 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 52 | 48 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.9% | +2.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 12 | 56 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $4.14 | $2.04 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.7% | +0.2% |
KO leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). MS leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Total Returns).
HCMA vs MS vs KO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is HCMA or MS or KO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Morgan Stanley (MS) is the stronger pick with 11.
5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 9% for The Coca-Cola Company (KO). HCM Acquisition Corp (HCMA) offers the better valuation at 0. 0x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Morgan Stanley (MS) a "Buy" — based on 52 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 — HCMA or MS or KO?
On trailing P/E, HCM Acquisition Corp (HCMA) is the cheapest at 0.
0x versus The Coca-Cola Company at 27. 2x. On forward P/E, Morgan Stanley is actually cheaper at 18. 0x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Morgan Stanley wins at 1. 88x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 26x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — HCMA or MS or KO?
Over the past 5 years, Morgan Stanley (MS) delivered a total return of +154.
7%, compared to +3. 5% for HCM Acquisition Corp (HCMA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MS returned +854. 4% versus HCMA's +3. 5%. 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 — HCMA or MS or KO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
20β versus Morgan Stanley's 1. 40β — meaning MS is approximately -801% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 133% versus 4% for Morgan Stanley — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — HCMA or MS or KO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Morgan Stanley (MS) is pulling ahead at 11.
5% versus 1. 9% for The Coca-Cola Company (KO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Morgan Stanley grew EPS 28. 3% year-over-year, compared to 23. 6% for The Coca-Cola Company. 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 — HCMA or MS or KO?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus 0. 0% for HCM Acquisition Corp — meaning it keeps 27. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: KO leads at 28. 7% versus 0. 0% for HCMA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — KO leads at 61. 6%, 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 HCMA or MS or KO 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, Morgan Stanley (MS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 88x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 26x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Morgan Stanley (MS) trades at 18. 0x forward P/E versus 25. 3x for The Coca-Cola Company — 7. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for KO: 4. 2% to $86. 13.
08Which pays a better dividend — HCMA or MS or KO?
In this comparison, KO (2.
5% yield), MS (1. 9% yield) pay a dividend. HCMA does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is HCMA or MS or KO 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). Both have compounded well over 10 years (KO: +121. 1%, MS: +854. 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.
10What are the main differences between HCMA and MS and KO?
These companies operate in different sectors (HCMA (Financial Services) and MS (Financial Services) and KO (Consumer Defensive)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: HCMA is a small-cap deep-value stock; MS is a large-cap quality compounder stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock. MS, KO pay a dividend while HCMA does 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.