AFRM vs. FTV: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison

Company Overview

AFRM’s market capitalization stands at 19.68 billion USD, while FTV’s is 24.70 billion USD, indicating their market valuations are broadly comparable.

AFRM’s beta of 3.58 points to significantly higher volatility compared to FTV (beta: 1.16), suggesting AFRM has greater potential for both gains and losses relative to market movements.

Performance Comparison

This chart compares the performance of AFRM and FTV over the past year by tracking the growth of an initial $10,000 investment in each (starting one year ago).

Data is adjusted for dividends and splits.

Valuation Metrics Comparison

This section compares the market valuation of AFRM and FTV. Key takeaways regarding their valuation, when viewed within their industry context, are presented in the commentary that follows.

• AFRM’s Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratio of -317.83 is negative, highlighting a lack of current profitability. This situation is a concern for its immediate financial performance and can impact investor confidence.
• AFRM’s Forward PEG ratio of -1.73 and FTV’s Forward PEG ratio of -0.31 are both in the negative range. For AFRM, a negative PEG ratio often stems from negative current earnings or forecasts of declining earnings, making its valuation difficult to assess relative to growth. Similarly, FTV’s negative PEG suggests underlying issues with profitability or growth expectations, raising questions about its stock price compared to future prospects.

Dividend Comparison

AFRM currently offers no dividend yield, suggesting it may be reinvesting available cash back into the business for future growth, while FTV provides a 0.44% dividend yield, offering investors a component of income return.

Financial Strength Metrics Comparison

This section evaluates the financial strength of AFRM and FTV. Noteworthy observations on their financial resilience, considered from an industry perspective, are detailed in the points that follow.

• FTV’s current ratio of 0.99 falls into the low category. This can indicate potential stress on the company's ability to address its short-term liabilities, suggesting that its liquid assets may not provide a strong safety margin over its immediate financial commitments, possibly impacting its operational flexibility.
• AFRM’s Debt-to-Equity (D/E) ratio of 2.56 is very high. This indicates that the company is significantly financed by debt, which can amplify returns but also substantially increases its financial risk profile and vulnerability to earnings fluctuations.
• AFRM’s Interest Coverage Ratio (ICR) of -0.24 is negative. This implies its operating earnings are insufficient to meet its interest expenses, a serious situation that threatens its financial stability and capacity to honor debt commitments.