Forcendra vs TJGC
FCDH and TJGC side by side, both in business services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How FCDH and TJGC compare
TJGC grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (−5.8% versus −8.8% for Forcendra).
TJGC keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of −81.8% compared with −114% at Forcendra.
Forcendra scores higher on the StockData Score (2 against 1 for TJGC), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | FCDH | TJGC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Share price | $0.602 | $31.89 |
| Change, 1 year | −95.7% | 858% |
| Beta (5Y) | 2.55 | 1.84 |
| Employees | 42 | – |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 0 | 0 |
| Health score | 1 | 1 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −8.8% | −5.8% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 23.7% (better) | 21.5% |
| Operating margin | −85.4% | −78.1% (better) |
| Net margin | −114% | −81.8% (better) |
| FCF margin | −46.9% (better) | −103% |
| Return on equity | −318% | −131% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | −277% | −180% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 1.51 |
| Interest coverage | −39.4× | −33.2× (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.47 (better) | 1.08 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 (better) | 2 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | – |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 0.05% | – |
| Held by insiders | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Go deeper
- FCDH stock overview
- FCDH income statement
- FCDH valuation and score
- TJGC stock overview
- TJGC income statement
- TJGC valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.