Software - Infrastructure
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
XBP vs ENSG vs NHC vs QUAD vs KO vs JPM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Care Facilities
Medical - Care Facilities
Specialty Business Services
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Banks - Diversified
XBP vs ENSG vs NHC vs QUAD vs KO vs JPM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Software - Infrastructure | Medical - Care Facilities | Medical - Care Facilities | Specialty Business Services | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Banks - Diversified |
| Market Cap | $23M | $8.73B | $3.09B | $397M | $355.61B | $896.00B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $653M | $5.27B | $1.52B | $2.37B | $49.28B | $280.33B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $1.10B | $363M | $124M | $27M | $13.70B | $57.05B |
| Gross Margin | 16.2% | 15.2% | 37.2% | 18.5% | 61.7% | 60.0% |
| Operating Margin | -2.5% | 8.5% | -0.4% | 5.0% | 29.3% | 25.9% |
| Forward P/E | 0.0x | 19.8x | 24.8x | 6.2x | 25.3x | 14.4x |
| Total Debt | $431M | $4.15B | $87M | $444M | $45.49B | $942.38B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $37M | $504M | $111M | $63M | $10.27B | $343.34B |
XBP vs ENSG vs NHC vs QUAD vs KO vs JPM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 21 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| XBP Global Holdings… (XBP) | 100 | 25.0 | -75.0% |
| The Ensign Group, I… (ENSG) | 100 | 179.5 | +79.5% |
| National HealthCare… (NHC) | 100 | 270.1 | +170.1% |
| Quad/Graphics, Inc. (QUAD) | 100 | 229.3 | +129.3% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 149.4 | +49.4% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 195.3 | +95.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: XBP vs ENSG vs NHC vs QUAD vs KO vs JPM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
XBP carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 454.1%, EPS growth 230.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 63.6%
- 454.1% revenue growth vs QUAD's -9.4%
- Lower P/E (0.0x vs 25.3x)
- 167.8% margin vs QUAD's 1.2%
ENSG is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 7.0% 10Y total return vs NHC's 242.4%
- Beta 0.17 vs XBP's 1.07, lower leverage
NHC is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 21 yrs, beta 0.55, yield 1.3%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.55, Low D/E 8.1%, current ratio 1.77x
- Beta 0.55, yield 1.3%, current ratio 1.77x
QUAD ranks third and is worth considering specifically for dividends.
- 3.8% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
Among these 6 stocks, KO doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
JPM is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.81 vs KO's 2.26
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 454.1% revenue growth vs QUAD's -9.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (0.0x vs 25.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 167.8% margin vs QUAD's 1.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.17 vs XBP's 1.07, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.8% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +150.0% vs ENSG's -1.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 155.0% ROA vs JPM's 1.3%, ROIC 3.8% vs 4.5% |
XBP vs ENSG vs NHC vs QUAD vs KO vs JPM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
XBP vs ENSG vs NHC vs QUAD vs KO vs JPM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 6 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
NHC leads in 2 of 6 categories
KO leads 1 • XBP leads 0 • ENSG leads 0 • QUAD leads 0 • JPM leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — XBP and KO each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM is the larger business by revenue, generating $280.3B annually — 429.5x XBP's $653M. XBP is the more profitable business, keeping 167.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to QUAD's 1.2%. On growth, XBP holds the edge at +4.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $653M | $5.3B | $1.5B | $2.4B | $49.3B | $280.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $29M | $558M | $39M | $196M | $15.5B | $81.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $1.1B | $363M | $124M | $27M | $13.7B | $57.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$164M | $406M | $168M | $44M | $12.6B | $100.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +16.2% | +15.2% | +37.2% | +18.5% | +61.7% | +60.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -2.5% | +8.5% | -0.4% | +5.0% | +29.3% | +25.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +167.8% | +6.9% | +8.1% | +1.2% | +27.8% | +20.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -25.2% | +7.7% | +11.0% | +1.9% | +25.5% | +36.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +4.2% | +18.4% | +1.7% | -7.7% | +12.1% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -15.3% | +21.9% | +9.7% | +18.2% | +18.2% | +16.0% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — XBP and QUAD each lead in 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 0.0x trailing earnings, XBP trades at a 100% valuation discount to KO's 27.2x 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 | $23M | $8.7B | $3.1B | $397M | $355.6B | $896.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $418M | $12.4B | $3.1B | $777M | $390.8B | $1.50T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 0.03x | 25.58x | 25.78x | 14.06x | 27.18x | 16.00x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 19.76x | 24.81x | 6.25x | 25.27x | 14.40x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.85x | 1.12x | — | 2.43x | 0.90x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 6.89x | 23.00x | 16.27x | 3.94x | 26.39x | 18.36x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.03x | 1.73x | 2.04x | 0.16x | 7.42x | 3.20x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.33x | 3.93x | 2.88x | 2.95x | 10.40x | 2.47x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 23.54x | 20.78x | 7.82x | 67.15x | 8.88x |
Profitability & Efficiency
NHC leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
XBP delivers a 17.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $17 in annual profit, vs $12 for NHC. NHC carries lower financial leverage with a 0.08x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to XBP's 4.94x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), NHC scores 7/9 vs XBP's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +17.4% | +16.6% | +11.6% | +25.0% | +41.1% | +15.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +155.0% | +6.8% | +8.0% | +2.2% | +13.1% | +1.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +3.8% | +7.0% | +9.9% | +17.9% | +15.8% | +4.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +4.0% | +10.2% | +11.2% | +19.3% | +17.3% | +8.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 4.94x | 1.86x | 0.08x | 3.45x | 1.33x | 2.60x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $394M | $3.7B | -$24M | $381M | $35.2B | $599.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $37M | $504M | $111M | $63M | $10.3B | $343.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $431M | $4.2B | $87M | $444M | $45.5B | $942.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -0.12x | 88.33x | 66.14x | 2.11x | 10.70x | 0.74x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
NHC leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in NHC five years ago would be worth $28,730 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,475 for XBP. Over the past 12 months, XBP leads with a +150.0% total return vs ENSG's -1.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NHC at 49.0% vs XBP's -39.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -65.5% | -14.1% | +52.1% | +34.1% | +20.3% | -0.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +150.0% | -1.1% | +91.5% | +46.8% | +17.2% | +21.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -77.4% | +60.7% | +230.9% | +123.5% | +47.0% | +138.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -75.3% | +78.9% | +187.3% | +119.3% | +65.6% | +118.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -74.8% | +701.2% | +242.4% | -39.2% | +121.1% | +465.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -39.1% | +17.1% | +49.0% | +30.7% | +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 XBP's 1.07 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 XBP's 28.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.07x | 0.17x | 0.55x | 0.74x | -0.20x | 0.94x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $8.55 | $218.00 | $205.06 | $8.64 | $84.04 | $337.25 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.41 | $134.79 | $93.54 | $5.01 | $65.35 | $262.71 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +28.7% | +68.5% | +96.4% | +87.8% | +98.3% | +95.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 43.1 | 22.7 | 60.4 | 51.8 | 60.6 | 59.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 15K | 564K | 109K | 185K | 12.7M | 7.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — QUAD and KO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ENSG as "Buy", QUAD as "Buy", KO as "Buy", JPM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 48.8% upside for ENSG (target: $222) vs 4.2% for KO (target: $86). For income investors, QUAD offers the higher dividend yield at 3.80% vs ENSG's 0.16%.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | — | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $222.33 | — | $8.00 | $86.13 | $339.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 13 | — | 7 | 48 | 61 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.2% | +1.3% | +3.8% | +2.5% | +1.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 19 | 21 | 1 | 56 | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.24 | $2.47 | $0.29 | $2.04 | $5.95 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.2% | +0.5% | +2.0% | +0.2% | +3.9% |
NHC leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). KO leads in 1 (Risk & Volatility). 3 tied.
XBP vs ENSG vs NHC vs QUAD vs KO vs JPM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is XBP or ENSG or NHC or QUAD or KO or JPM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, XBP Global Holdings, Inc.
(XBP) is the stronger pick with 454. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -9. 4% for Quad/Graphics, Inc. (QUAD). XBP Global Holdings, Inc. (XBP) offers the better valuation at 0. 0x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate The Ensign Group, Inc. (ENSG) a "Buy" — based on 13 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 — XBP or ENSG or NHC or QUAD or KO or JPM?
On trailing P/E, XBP Global Holdings, Inc.
(XBP) is the cheapest at 0. 0x versus The Coca-Cola Company at 27. 2x. On forward P/E, Quad/Graphics, Inc. is actually cheaper at 6. 2x — 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: 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 — XBP or ENSG or NHC or QUAD or KO or JPM?
Over the past 5 years, National HealthCare Corporation (NHC) delivered a total return of +187.
3%, compared to -75. 3% for XBP Global Holdings, Inc. (XBP). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ENSG returned +701. 2% versus XBP's -74. 8%. 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 — XBP or ENSG or NHC or QUAD 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 XBP Global Holdings, Inc. 's 1. 07β — meaning XBP is approximately -635% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, National HealthCare Corporation (NHC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 8% versus 5% for XBP Global Holdings, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — XBP or ENSG or NHC or QUAD or KO or JPM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), XBP Global Holdings, Inc.
(XBP) is pulling ahead at 454. 1% versus -9. 4% for Quad/Graphics, Inc. (QUAD). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: XBP Global Holdings, Inc. grew EPS 230. 0% year-over-year, compared to 1. 5% for JPMorgan Chase & Co.. Over a 3-year CAGR, XBP leads at 63. 6% 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 — XBP or ENSG or NHC or QUAD or KO or JPM?
XBP Global Holdings, Inc.
(XBP) is the more profitable company, earning 139. 5% net margin versus 1. 1% for Quad/Graphics, Inc. — meaning it keeps 139. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: KO leads at 28. 7% versus 1. 5% for XBP. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NHC leads at 67. 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 XBP or ENSG or NHC or QUAD 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, Quad/Graphics, Inc. (QUAD) trades at 6. 2x forward P/E versus 25. 3x for The Coca-Cola Company — 19. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ENSG: 48. 8% to $222. 33.
08Which pays a better dividend — XBP or ENSG or NHC or QUAD or KO or JPM?
In this comparison, QUAD (3.
8% yield), KO (2. 5% yield), JPM (1. 9% yield), NHC (1. 3% yield), ENSG (0. 2% yield) pay a dividend. XBP does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is XBP or ENSG or NHC or QUAD 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). Both have compounded well over 10 years (KO: +121. 1%, XBP: -74. 8%), 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 XBP and ENSG and NHC and QUAD and KO and JPM?
These companies operate in different sectors (XBP (Technology) and ENSG (Healthcare) and NHC (Healthcare) and QUAD (Industrials) 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: XBP is a small-cap high-growth stock; ENSG is a small-cap high-growth stock; NHC is a small-cap high-growth stock; QUAD is a small-cap deep-value stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock. NHC, QUAD, KO, JPM pay a dividend while XBP, ENSG 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.