Go Pro
→ “Elon’s nightmare” could fund your retirement (From Chaikin Analytics) (Ad)tc pixel Free CYN Stock Alerts

CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income (CYN) Competitors

CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income logo
GBX 431 0.00 (0.00%)
As of 09/11/2026 12:38 PM Eastern
Compare

CYN vs. IPO, BSIF, SCAM, HFEL, and CGI

Should you buy CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income stock or one of its competitors? CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income's main competitors and comparable companies include IP Group (IPO), Bluefield Solar Income Fund (BSIF), Scottish American Investment (SCAM), Henderson Far East Income (HFEL), and Canadian General Investments (CGI). Companies are selected based on similarities in market, industry, and size. These companies are all part of the "asset management & custody banks" industry.

How does CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income compare to IP Group?

IP Group (LON:IPO) and CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income (LON:CYN) are both small-cap finance companies, but which is the better business? We will compare the two companies based on the strength of their risk, valuation, analyst recommendations, institutional ownership, profitability, media sentiment, dividends and earnings.

30.8% of IP Group shares are owned by institutional investors. Comparatively, 0.8% of CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income shares are owned by institutional investors. 1.6% of IP Group shares are owned by insiders. Comparatively, 1.6% of CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income shares are owned by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that endowments, hedge funds and large money managers believe a company is poised for long-term growth.

IP Group has a net margin of 148.78% compared to CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income's net margin of -974.80%. CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income's return on equity of 51.26% beat IP Group's return on equity.

Company Net Margins Return on Equity Return on Assets
IP Group148.78% 7.14% -10.50%
CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income -974.80%51.26%-4.86%

CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income has lower revenue, but higher earnings than IP Group. CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than IP Group, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

CompanyGross RevenuePrice/Sales RatioNet IncomeEarnings Per SharePrice/Earnings Ratio
IP Group£90.60M6.44-£209.94M£7.109.30
CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income£68.45M2.45£8.67M£127.753.37

IP Group currently has a consensus target price of GBX 105, indicating a potential upside of 59.09%. Given IP Group's stronger consensus rating and higher probable upside, equities research analysts clearly believe IP Group is more favorable than CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income.

Company Sell Ratings Hold Ratings Buy Ratings Strong Buy Ratings Rating Score
IP Group
0 Sell rating(s)
0 Hold rating(s)
2 Buy rating(s)
0 Strong Buy rating(s)
3.00
CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income
0 Sell rating(s)
0 Hold rating(s)
0 Buy rating(s)
0 Strong Buy rating(s)
0.00

IP Group has a beta of 1.272, meaning that its stock price is 27% more volatile than the broader market. Comparatively, CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income has a beta of 1.1871496, meaning that its stock price is 19% more volatile than the broader market.

In the previous week, IP Group and IP Group both had 1 articles in the media. CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income's average media sentiment score of 1.54 beat IP Group's score of 0.00 indicating that CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income is being referred to more favorably in the news media.

Company Very Positive Positive Neutral Negative Very Negative Overall Sentiment
IP Group
0 Very Positive mention(s)
0 Positive mention(s)
1 Neutral mention(s)
0 Negative mention(s)
0 Very Negative mention(s)
Neutral
CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income
1 Very Positive mention(s)
0 Positive mention(s)
0 Neutral mention(s)
0 Negative mention(s)
0 Very Negative mention(s)
Very Positive

Summary

IP Group beats CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income on 9 of the 15 factors compared between the two stocks.

How does CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income compare to Bluefield Solar Income Fund?

Bluefield Solar Income Fund (LON:BSIF) and CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income (LON:CYN) are both small-cap finance companies, but which is the better stock? We will contrast the two businesses based on the strength of their risk, analyst recommendations, earnings, valuation, institutional ownership, dividends, media sentiment and profitability.

41.4% of Bluefield Solar Income Fund shares are owned by institutional investors. Comparatively, 0.8% of CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income shares are owned by institutional investors. 0.3% of Bluefield Solar Income Fund shares are owned by insiders. Comparatively, 1.6% of CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income shares are owned by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that large money managers, hedge funds and endowments believe a stock is poised for long-term growth.

CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income has higher revenue and earnings than Bluefield Solar Income Fund. Bluefield Solar Income Fund is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

CompanyGross RevenuePrice/Sales RatioNet IncomeEarnings Per SharePrice/Earnings Ratio
Bluefield Solar Income Fund-£52.67M-11.50-£9.36M-£9.31N/A
CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income£68.45M2.45£8.67M£127.753.37

In the previous week, CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income had 1 more articles in the media than Bluefield Solar Income Fund. MarketBeat recorded 1 mentions for CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income and 0 mentions for Bluefield Solar Income Fund. CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income's average media sentiment score of 1.54 beat Bluefield Solar Income Fund's score of 0.00 indicating that CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income is being referred to more favorably in the news media.

Company Overall Sentiment
Bluefield Solar Income Fund Neutral
CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income Very Positive

Bluefield Solar Income Fund pays an annual dividend of GBX 8.90 per share and has a dividend yield of 8.7%. CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income pays an annual dividend of GBX 12.79 per share and has a dividend yield of 3.0%. Bluefield Solar Income Fund pays out -95.6% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income pays out 10.0% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Both companies have healthy payout ratios and should be able to cover their dividend payments with earnings for the next several years. Bluefield Solar Income Fund is clearly the better dividend stock, given its higher yield and lower payout ratio.

Bluefield Solar Income Fund has a beta of 0.032, suggesting that its stock price is 97% less volatile than the broader market. Comparatively, CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income has a beta of 1.1871496, suggesting that its stock price is 19% more volatile than the broader market.

Bluefield Solar Income Fund presently has a consensus price target of GBX 95, indicating a potential downside of 7.11%. Given Bluefield Solar Income Fund's stronger consensus rating and higher possible upside, equities research analysts clearly believe Bluefield Solar Income Fund is more favorable than CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income.

Company Sell Ratings Hold Ratings Buy Ratings Strong Buy Ratings Rating Score
Bluefield Solar Income Fund
0 Sell rating(s)
2 Hold rating(s)
0 Buy rating(s)
0 Strong Buy rating(s)
2.00
CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income
0 Sell rating(s)
0 Hold rating(s)
0 Buy rating(s)
0 Strong Buy rating(s)
0.00

Bluefield Solar Income Fund has a net margin of 472.18% compared to CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income's net margin of -974.80%. CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income's return on equity of 51.26% beat Bluefield Solar Income Fund's return on equity.

Company Net Margins Return on Equity Return on Assets
Bluefield Solar Income Fund472.18% -8.32% 0.96%
CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income -974.80%51.26%-4.86%

Summary

CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income beats Bluefield Solar Income Fund on 10 of the 17 factors compared between the two stocks.

How does CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income compare to Scottish American Investment?

Scottish American Investment (LON:SCAM) and CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income (LON:CYN) are both small-cap finance companies, but which is the better business? We will compare the two companies based on the strength of their dividends, media sentiment, institutional ownership, profitability, earnings, analyst recommendations, valuation and risk.

CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income has lower revenue, but higher earnings than Scottish American Investment. Scottish American Investment is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

CompanyGross RevenuePrice/Sales RatioNet IncomeEarnings Per SharePrice/Earnings Ratio
Scottish American Investment£74.89M0.00N/A£46.00N/A
CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income£68.45M2.45£8.67M£127.753.37

In the previous week, CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income had 1 more articles in the media than Scottish American Investment. MarketBeat recorded 1 mentions for CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income and 0 mentions for Scottish American Investment. CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income's average media sentiment score of 1.54 beat Scottish American Investment's score of 0.00 indicating that CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income is being referred to more favorably in the news media.

Company Overall Sentiment
Scottish American Investment Neutral
CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income Very Positive

0.8% of CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income shares are owned by institutional investors. 1.6% of CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income shares are owned by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that endowments, large money managers and hedge funds believe a company is poised for long-term growth.

Scottish American Investment pays an annual dividend of GBX 0.12 per share. CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income pays an annual dividend of GBX 12.79 per share and has a dividend yield of 3.0%. Scottish American Investment pays out 0.3% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income pays out 10.0% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Both companies have healthy payout ratios and should be able to cover their dividend payments with earnings for the next several years.

Scottish American Investment has a net margin of 0.00% compared to CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income's net margin of -974.80%. CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income's return on equity of 51.26% beat Scottish American Investment's return on equity.

Company Net Margins Return on Equity Return on Assets
Scottish American InvestmentN/A N/A N/A
CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income -974.80%51.26%-4.86%

Summary

CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income beats Scottish American Investment on 7 of the 12 factors compared between the two stocks.

How does CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income compare to Henderson Far East Income?

Henderson Far East Income (LON:HFEL) and CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income (LON:CYN) are both small-cap finance companies, but which is the superior stock? We will contrast the two businesses based on the strength of their earnings, dividends, institutional ownership, media sentiment, risk, profitability, analyst recommendations and valuation.

CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income has lower revenue, but higher earnings than Henderson Far East Income. CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Henderson Far East Income, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

CompanyGross RevenuePrice/Sales RatioNet IncomeEarnings Per SharePrice/Earnings Ratio
Henderson Far East Income£139.58M4.44-£10.33M£72.123.67
CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income£68.45M2.45£8.67M£127.753.37

In the previous week, Henderson Far East Income and Henderson Far East Income both had 1 articles in the media. CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income's average media sentiment score of 1.54 beat Henderson Far East Income's score of 0.00 indicating that CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income is being referred to more favorably in the news media.

Company Very Positive Positive Neutral Negative Very Negative Overall Sentiment
Henderson Far East Income
0 Very Positive mention(s)
0 Positive mention(s)
1 Neutral mention(s)
0 Negative mention(s)
0 Very Negative mention(s)
Neutral
CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income
1 Very Positive mention(s)
0 Positive mention(s)
0 Neutral mention(s)
0 Negative mention(s)
0 Very Negative mention(s)
Very Positive

6.9% of Henderson Far East Income shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 0.8% of CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income shares are held by institutional investors. 0.1% of Henderson Far East Income shares are held by insiders. Comparatively, 1.6% of CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income shares are held by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that large money managers, hedge funds and endowments believe a stock is poised for long-term growth.

Henderson Far East Income pays an annual dividend of GBX 24.95 per share and has a dividend yield of 9.4%. CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income pays an annual dividend of GBX 12.79 per share and has a dividend yield of 3.0%. Henderson Far East Income pays out 34.6% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income pays out 10.0% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Both companies have healthy payout ratios and should be able to cover their dividend payments with earnings for the next several years.

Henderson Far East Income has a beta of 0.518, meaning that its stock price is 48% less volatile than the broader market. Comparatively, CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income has a beta of 1.1871496, meaning that its stock price is 19% more volatile than the broader market.

Henderson Far East Income has a net margin of 92.44% compared to CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income's net margin of -974.80%. CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income's return on equity of 51.26% beat Henderson Far East Income's return on equity.

Company Net Margins Return on Equity Return on Assets
Henderson Far East Income92.44% 28.74% -0.81%
CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income -974.80%51.26%-4.86%

Summary

Henderson Far East Income and CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income tied by winning 7 of the 14 factors compared between the two stocks.

How does CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income compare to Canadian General Investments?

Canadian General Investments (LON:CGI) and CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income (LON:CYN) are both small-cap finance companies, but which is the superior stock? We will compare the two companies based on the strength of their earnings, institutional ownership, dividends, media sentiment, risk, valuation, profitability and analyst recommendations.

Canadian General Investments has higher revenue and earnings than CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income. Canadian General Investments is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

CompanyGross RevenuePrice/Sales RatioNet IncomeEarnings Per SharePrice/Earnings Ratio
Canadian General Investments£375.62M1.56£283.54M£1.78 thousand1.59
CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income£68.45M2.45£8.67M£127.753.37

Canadian General Investments has a net margin of 472.76% compared to CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income's net margin of -974.80%. CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income's return on equity of 51.26% beat Canadian General Investments' return on equity.

Company Net Margins Return on Equity Return on Assets
Canadian General Investments472.76% 21.17% 8.12%
CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income -974.80%51.26%-4.86%

Canadian General Investments has a beta of 0.894, meaning that its share price is 11% less volatile than the broader market. Comparatively, CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income has a beta of 1.1871496, meaning that its share price is 19% more volatile than the broader market.

0.2% of Canadian General Investments shares are owned by institutional investors. Comparatively, 0.8% of CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income shares are owned by institutional investors. 82.7% of Canadian General Investments shares are owned by insiders. Comparatively, 1.6% of CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income shares are owned by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that hedge funds, endowments and large money managers believe a stock will outperform the market over the long term.

Canadian General Investments pays an annual dividend of GBX 116 per share and has a dividend yield of 4.1%. CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income pays an annual dividend of GBX 12.79 per share and has a dividend yield of 3.0%. Canadian General Investments pays out 6.5% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income pays out 10.0% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Both companies have healthy payout ratios and should be able to cover their dividend payments with earnings for the next several years. Canadian General Investments is clearly the better dividend stock, given its higher yield and lower payout ratio.

In the previous week, CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income had 1 more articles in the media than Canadian General Investments. MarketBeat recorded 1 mentions for CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income and 0 mentions for Canadian General Investments. CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income's average media sentiment score of 1.54 beat Canadian General Investments' score of 0.00 indicating that CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income is being referred to more favorably in the news media.

Company Overall Sentiment
Canadian General Investments Neutral
CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income Very Positive

Summary

Canadian General Investments beats CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income on 8 of the 15 factors compared between the two stocks.

Get CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income News Delivered to You Automatically

Sign up to receive the latest news and ratings for CYN and its competitors with MarketBeat's FREE daily newsletter.

Subscribe Now
SMS is currently available in Australia, Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States. By entering your phone number and clicking the sign-up button, you agree to receive periodic text messages from MarketBeat at the phone number you submitted, including texts that may be sent using an automatic telephone dialing system. Message and data rates may apply. Message frequency will vary. Messages will consist of stock alerts, news stories, and partner advertisements/offers. Consent is not a condition of the purchase of any goods or services. Text HELP for help/customer support. Unsubscribe at any time by replying "STOP" to any text message that you receive from MarketBeat or by visiting our mailing preferences page. Read our full terms of service and privacy policy.

New MarketBeat Followers Over Time

This chart shows the number of new MarketBeat users adding CYN and its top 5 competitors to their watchlist. Each company is represented with a line over a 90 day period.
Skip Chart

Media Sentiment Over Time

This chart shows the average media sentiment of LON and its competitors over the past 90 days as caculated by MarketBeat. The averaged score is equivalent to the following: Very Negative Sentiment <= -1.5, Negative Sentiment > -1.5 and <= -0.5, Neutral Sentiment > -0.5 and < 0.5, Positive Sentiment >= 0.5 and < 1.5, and Very Positive Sentiment >= 1.5.
Skip Chart

CYN vs. The Competition

Export
MetricCQS Natural Resources Growth and IncomeCapital Markets IndustryFinance SectorLON Exchange
Market Cap£167.91M£5.51B£13.99B£2.87B
Dividend Yield6.64%7.47%5.94%6.23%
P/E Ratio3.3730.5425.67366.83
Price / Sales2.451,218.06506.9183,599.70
Price / Cash21.8747.8940.1627.89
Price / Book2.063.532.756.33
Net Income£8.67M£418.04M£1.32B£5.89B
7 Day Performance1.41%-1.39%-1.17%-0.69%
1 Month Performance7.48%-1.45%0.25%0.18%
1 Year Performance57.30%4.83%9.27%20.03%

CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income Competitors List

Export
CompanyMarketRankShare PriceAnalysts' Price Target1Y Price PerformanceMarket CapRevenueP/E RatioEmployee CountIndicator(s)
CYN
CQS Natural Resources Growth and Income
N/AGBX 431
flat		N/A+56.2%£167.91M£68.45M3.3740
IPO
IP Group
3.4723 of 5 stars		GBX 69.20
+0.3%		GBX 105
+51.7%		+13.2%£611.33M£90.60M9.7595
BSIF
Bluefield Solar Income Fund
N/AGBX 102.27
flat		GBX 95
-7.1%		N/A£605.52M-£52.67MN/AN/A
SCAM
Scottish American Investment
N/AN/AN/AN/A£603.25M£74.89M9.08N/A
HFEL
Henderson Far East Income
N/AGBX 265.50
+0.8%		N/A+10.0%£598.57M£139.58M3.68N/A

Related Companies and Tools

Related Companies
Top 10 Stock Comparisons

This page (LON:CYN) was last updated on 9/12/2026 by MarketBeat.com Staff.
From Our Partners
Print this before your next trade
Bill Poulos is offering his Smart Trade Options Checklist at no cost today - normally priced at $29.97. It'...
Profits Run | Sponsoredtc pixel
This 38 Dollar Fund Holds Every Major AI Stock and Pays Weekly
The biggest AI stocks like Nvidia, CrowdStrike, and Palantir now trade for hundreds of dollars a share. One fu...
Investors Alley | Sponsoredtc pixel
The retirement stock I'd buy before Nvidia today
In 2014, Marc Chaikin pointed readers toward Nvidia. Now the 60-year Wall Street veteran and creator of the Ch...
Chaikin Analytics | Sponsoredtc pixel
Why major institutions are piling into this digital asset now
BlackRock, JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs, and Fidelity are reportedly accumulating a scarce blockchain asset - one t...
Awesomely | Sponsoredtc pixel
My ‘one day’ retirement secret
TradeSmith's AI research team, backed by a $17 million investment and led by a former NSA codebreaker, built a...
TradeSmith | Sponsoredtc pixel
17 Nobel Prize winners… one startling warning
On July 13, 17 Nobel laureates including Bernanke, Krugman, and Stiglitz signed an 88-word letter warning that...
Porter & Company | Sponsoredtc pixel
your job is on the list
The CEO of one of the largest AI labs on earth said it plainly: AI could wipe out half of all entry-level whit...
Behind the Markets | Sponsoredtc pixel
Three companies about to leapfrog Nvidia [And transform the entire industry]
Three under-the-radar companies are already building the infrastructure behind a 200 billion government-backed...
Eagle Publishing | Sponsoredtc pixel