New Mountain Finance Competitors

New Mountain Finance (NASDAQ:NMFC) and Prospect Capital (NASDAQ:PSEC) are both finance companies, but which is the superior stock? We will compare the two companies based on the strength of their risk, earnings, dividends, institutional ownership, valuation, profitability and analyst recommendations.

Volatility & Risk

New Mountain Finance has a beta of 1.39, meaning that its share price is 39% more volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, Prospect Capital has a beta of 0.97, meaning that its share price is 3% less volatile than the S&P 500.

Valuation and Earnings

This table compares New Mountain Finance and Prospect Capital's gross revenue, earnings per share (EPS) and valuation.

New Mountain Finance has higher earnings, but lower revenue than Prospect Capital. New Mountain Finance is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Prospect Capital, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Profitability

This table compares New Mountain Finance and Prospect Capital's net margins, return on equity and return on assets.

Insider and Institutional Ownership

34.5% of New Mountain Finance shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 10.3% of Prospect Capital shares are held by institutional investors. 9.1% of New Mountain Finance shares are held by company insiders. Comparatively, 26.8% of Prospect Capital shares are held by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that large money managers, endowments and hedge funds believe a stock is poised for long-term growth.

Dividends

New Mountain Finance pays an annual dividend of $1.20 per share and has a dividend yield of 9.2%. Prospect Capital pays an annual dividend of $0.72 per share and has a dividend yield of 8.9%. New Mountain Finance pays out 94.5% of its earnings in the form of a dividend, suggesting it may not have sufficient earnings to cover its dividend payment in the future. Prospect Capital pays out 100.0% of its earnings in the form of a dividend, suggesting it may not have sufficient earnings to cover its dividend payment in the future. Prospect Capital has increased its dividend for 1 consecutive years. New Mountain Finance is clearly the better dividend stock, given its higher yield and lower payout ratio.

Analyst Recommendations

This is a breakdown of current ratings and target prices for New Mountain Finance and Prospect Capital, as provided by MarketBeat.com.

New Mountain Finance currently has a consensus price target of $11.1667, indicating a potential downside of 14.50%. Prospect Capital has a consensus price target of $4.50, indicating a potential downside of 44.24%. Given New Mountain Finance's stronger consensus rating and higher probable upside, equities research analysts plainly believe New Mountain Finance is more favorable than Prospect Capital.

Summary

New Mountain Finance beats Prospect Capital on 10 of the 17 factors compared between the two stocks.

New Mountain Finance (NASDAQ:NMFC) and Golub Capital BDC (NASDAQ:GBDC) are both finance companies, but which is the superior stock? We will compare the two businesses based on the strength of their institutional ownership, analyst recommendations, profitability, risk, earnings, dividends and valuation.

Dividends

New Mountain Finance pays an annual dividend of $1.20 per share and has a dividend yield of 9.2%. Golub Capital BDC pays an annual dividend of $1.16 per share and has a dividend yield of 7.5%. New Mountain Finance pays out 94.5% of its earnings in the form of a dividend, suggesting it may not have sufficient earnings to cover its dividend payment in the future. Golub Capital BDC pays out 95.1% of its earnings in the form of a dividend, suggesting it may not have sufficient earnings to cover its dividend payment in the future. Golub Capital BDC has raised its dividend for 1 consecutive years. New Mountain Finance is clearly the better dividend stock, given its higher yield and lower payout ratio.

Risk & Volatility

New Mountain Finance has a beta of 1.39, indicating that its share price is 39% more volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, Golub Capital BDC has a beta of 0.69, indicating that its share price is 31% less volatile than the S&P 500.

Analyst Recommendations

This is a breakdown of recent ratings and target prices for New Mountain Finance and Golub Capital BDC, as reported by MarketBeat.com.

New Mountain Finance presently has a consensus target price of $11.1667, indicating a potential downside of 14.50%. Golub Capital BDC has a consensus target price of $11.50, indicating a potential downside of 25.90%. Given New Mountain Finance's stronger consensus rating and higher possible upside, equities analysts clearly believe New Mountain Finance is more favorable than Golub Capital BDC.

Valuation & Earnings

This table compares New Mountain Finance and Golub Capital BDC's gross revenue, earnings per share (EPS) and valuation.

New Mountain Finance has higher earnings, but lower revenue than Golub Capital BDC. New Mountain Finance is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Golub Capital BDC, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Insider & Institutional Ownership

34.5% of New Mountain Finance shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 36.9% of Golub Capital BDC shares are held by institutional investors. 9.1% of New Mountain Finance shares are held by company insiders. Comparatively, 6.9% of Golub Capital BDC shares are held by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that large money managers, hedge funds and endowments believe a company will outperform the market over the long term.

Profitability

This table compares New Mountain Finance and Golub Capital BDC's net margins, return on equity and return on assets.

Summary

New Mountain Finance beats Golub Capital BDC on 10 of the 17 factors compared between the two stocks.

New Mountain Finance (NASDAQ:NMFC) and Sixth Street Specialty Lending (NYSE:TSLX) are both small-cap finance companies, but which is the better business? We will compare the two companies based on the strength of their institutional ownership, profitability, analyst recommendations, valuation, earnings, risk and dividends.

Analyst Recommendations

This is a summary of current ratings and price targets for New Mountain Finance and Sixth Street Specialty Lending, as provided by MarketBeat.

New Mountain Finance currently has a consensus price target of $11.1667, indicating a potential downside of 14.50%. Sixth Street Specialty Lending has a consensus price target of $19.1429, indicating a potential downside of 14.27%. Given Sixth Street Specialty Lending's stronger consensus rating and higher possible upside, analysts clearly believe Sixth Street Specialty Lending is more favorable than New Mountain Finance.

Profitability

This table compares New Mountain Finance and Sixth Street Specialty Lending's net margins, return on equity and return on assets.

Insider & Institutional Ownership

34.5% of New Mountain Finance shares are owned by institutional investors. Comparatively, 55.7% of Sixth Street Specialty Lending shares are owned by institutional investors. 9.1% of New Mountain Finance shares are owned by insiders. Comparatively, 4.4% of Sixth Street Specialty Lending shares are owned by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that endowments, large money managers and hedge funds believe a stock is poised for long-term growth.

Dividends

New Mountain Finance pays an annual dividend of $1.20 per share and has a dividend yield of 9.2%. Sixth Street Specialty Lending pays an annual dividend of $1.64 per share and has a dividend yield of 7.3%. New Mountain Finance pays out 94.5% of its earnings in the form of a dividend, suggesting it may not have sufficient earnings to cover its dividend payment in the future. Sixth Street Specialty Lending pays out 84.5% of its earnings in the form of a dividend, suggesting it may not have sufficient earnings to cover its dividend payment in the future. Sixth Street Specialty Lending has increased its dividend for 1 consecutive years.

Valuation & Earnings

This table compares New Mountain Finance and Sixth Street Specialty Lending's revenue, earnings per share and valuation.

Sixth Street Specialty Lending has lower revenue, but higher earnings than New Mountain Finance. New Mountain Finance is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Sixth Street Specialty Lending, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Risk and Volatility

New Mountain Finance has a beta of 1.39, suggesting that its share price is 39% more volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, Sixth Street Specialty Lending has a beta of 1.16, suggesting that its share price is 16% more volatile than the S&P 500.

Summary

Sixth Street Specialty Lending beats New Mountain Finance on 13 of the 17 factors compared between the two stocks.

PennantPark Floating Rate Capital (NASDAQ:PFLT) and New Mountain Finance (NASDAQ:NMFC) are both small-cap finance companies, but which is the better business? We will contrast the two companies based on the strength of their profitability, earnings, institutional ownership, dividends, valuation, analyst recommendations and risk.

Profitability

This table compares PennantPark Floating Rate Capital and New Mountain Finance's net margins, return on equity and return on assets.

Earnings & Valuation

This table compares PennantPark Floating Rate Capital and New Mountain Finance's revenue, earnings per share and valuation.

New Mountain Finance has higher revenue and earnings than PennantPark Floating Rate Capital. New Mountain Finance is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than PennantPark Floating Rate Capital, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Volatility & Risk

PennantPark Floating Rate Capital has a beta of 1.97, indicating that its share price is 97% more volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, New Mountain Finance has a beta of 1.39, indicating that its share price is 39% more volatile than the S&P 500.

Analyst Recommendations

This is a breakdown of current ratings and recommmendations for PennantPark Floating Rate Capital and New Mountain Finance, as provided by MarketBeat.com.

PennantPark Floating Rate Capital presently has a consensus target price of $10.50, indicating a potential downside of 17.39%. New Mountain Finance has a consensus target price of $11.1667, indicating a potential downside of 14.50%. Given New Mountain Finance's higher probable upside, analysts plainly believe New Mountain Finance is more favorable than PennantPark Floating Rate Capital.

Dividends

PennantPark Floating Rate Capital pays an annual dividend of $1.14 per share and has a dividend yield of 9.0%. New Mountain Finance pays an annual dividend of $1.20 per share and has a dividend yield of 9.2%. PennantPark Floating Rate Capital pays out 101.8% of its earnings in the form of a dividend, suggesting it may not have sufficient earnings to cover its dividend payment in the future. New Mountain Finance pays out 94.5% of its earnings in the form of a dividend, suggesting it may not have sufficient earnings to cover its dividend payment in the future. PennantPark Floating Rate Capital has raised its dividend for 1 consecutive years. New Mountain Finance is clearly the better dividend stock, given its higher yield and lower payout ratio.

Institutional & Insider Ownership

29.3% of PennantPark Floating Rate Capital shares are owned by institutional investors. Comparatively, 34.5% of New Mountain Finance shares are owned by institutional investors. 2.0% of PennantPark Floating Rate Capital shares are owned by company insiders. Comparatively, 9.1% of New Mountain Finance shares are owned by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that endowments, large money managers and hedge funds believe a stock is poised for long-term growth.

Summary

New Mountain Finance beats PennantPark Floating Rate Capital on 10 of the 16 factors compared between the two stocks.

New Mountain Finance (NASDAQ:NMFC) and TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC (NYSE:TPVG) are both small-cap finance companies, but which is the better business? We will contrast the two businesses based on the strength of their dividends, analyst recommendations, risk, institutional ownership, earnings, valuation and profitability.

Earnings and Valuation

This table compares New Mountain Finance and TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC's top-line revenue, earnings per share (EPS) and valuation.

New Mountain Finance has higher revenue and earnings than TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC. TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than New Mountain Finance, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Volatility & Risk

New Mountain Finance has a beta of 1.39, suggesting that its stock price is 39% more volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC has a beta of 1.9, suggesting that its stock price is 90% more volatile than the S&P 500.

Dividends

New Mountain Finance pays an annual dividend of $1.20 per share and has a dividend yield of 9.2%. TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC pays an annual dividend of $1.44 per share and has a dividend yield of 9.4%. New Mountain Finance pays out 94.5% of its earnings in the form of a dividend, suggesting it may not have sufficient earnings to cover its dividend payment in the future. TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC pays out 93.5% of its earnings in the form of a dividend, suggesting it may not have sufficient earnings to cover its dividend payment in the future. TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC has increased its dividend for 1 consecutive years. TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC is clearly the better dividend stock, given its higher yield and longer track record of dividend growth.

Analyst Ratings

This is a summary of recent recommendations for New Mountain Finance and TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC, as reported by MarketBeat.com.

New Mountain Finance currently has a consensus target price of $11.1667, suggesting a potential downside of 14.50%. TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC has a consensus target price of $10.9583, suggesting a potential downside of 28.33%. Given New Mountain Finance's higher probable upside, equities analysts plainly believe New Mountain Finance is more favorable than TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC.

Profitability

This table compares New Mountain Finance and TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC's net margins, return on equity and return on assets.

Insider and Institutional Ownership

34.5% of New Mountain Finance shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 26.9% of TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC shares are held by institutional investors. 9.1% of New Mountain Finance shares are held by company insiders. Comparatively, 1.2% of TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC shares are held by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that hedge funds, endowments and large money managers believe a company is poised for long-term growth.

Summary

TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC beats New Mountain Finance on 12 of the 17 factors compared between the two stocks.

New Mountain Finance (NASDAQ:NMFC) and Gladstone Investment (NASDAQ:GAIN) are both small-cap finance companies, but which is the superior business? We will compare the two companies based on the strength of their institutional ownership, earnings, profitability, analyst recommendations, dividends, valuation and risk.

Risk & Volatility

New Mountain Finance has a beta of 1.39, suggesting that its stock price is 39% more volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, Gladstone Investment has a beta of 1.44, suggesting that its stock price is 44% more volatile than the S&P 500.

Analyst Recommendations

This is a summary of recent ratings for New Mountain Finance and Gladstone Investment, as provided by MarketBeat.com.

New Mountain Finance presently has a consensus target price of $11.1667, indicating a potential downside of 14.50%. Given New Mountain Finance's stronger consensus rating and higher possible upside, equities analysts plainly believe New Mountain Finance is more favorable than Gladstone Investment.

Valuation and Earnings

This table compares New Mountain Finance and Gladstone Investment's gross revenue, earnings per share (EPS) and valuation.

New Mountain Finance has higher revenue and earnings than Gladstone Investment. New Mountain Finance is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Gladstone Investment, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Dividends

New Mountain Finance pays an annual dividend of $1.20 per share and has a dividend yield of 9.2%. Gladstone Investment pays an annual dividend of $0.84 per share and has a dividend yield of 5.9%. New Mountain Finance pays out 94.5% of its earnings in the form of a dividend, suggesting it may not have sufficient earnings to cover its dividend payment in the future. Gladstone Investment pays out 93.3% of its earnings in the form of a dividend, suggesting it may not have sufficient earnings to cover its dividend payment in the future. Gladstone Investment has increased its dividend for 1 consecutive years.

Institutional & Insider Ownership

34.5% of New Mountain Finance shares are owned by institutional investors. Comparatively, 12.1% of Gladstone Investment shares are owned by institutional investors. 9.1% of New Mountain Finance shares are owned by insiders. Comparatively, 2.6% of Gladstone Investment shares are owned by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that hedge funds, endowments and large money managers believe a stock is poised for long-term growth.

Profitability

This table compares New Mountain Finance and Gladstone Investment's net margins, return on equity and return on assets.

Summary

New Mountain Finance beats Gladstone Investment on 12 of the 17 factors compared between the two stocks.