Paranovus Entertainment Technology vs ReposiTrak
PAVS and TRAK side by side, both in computer programming, data processing, and other computer related services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How PAVS and TRAK compare
Paranovus Entertainment Technology grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (20311% versus 3.0% for ReposiTrak).
ReposiTrak keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 32.5% compared with −87.2% at Paranovus Entertainment Technology.
ReposiTrak pays a dividend yielding 1.1%; Paranovus Entertainment Technology does not pay one.
ReposiTrak scores higher on the StockData Score (21 against 3 for Paranovus Entertainment Technology), 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 | PAVS | TRAK |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | – | $133M |
| Share price | $2.52 | $7.32 |
| Change, 1 year | −100.0% | −51.4% |
| Change, 5 years | −100.0% | 25.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.54 | 0.80 |
| Employees | 34 | 67 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 3 | 21 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 6 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 0 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 1 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 18.8× |
| P/S | – | 5.7× |
| P/B | – | 2.5× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 12.5× |
| P/FCF | – | 16.2× |
| PEG | – | 1.44 |
| FCF yield | – | 6.2% |
| Fair value | – | $10.42 |
| Margin of safety | – | 29.8% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 20311% (better) | 3.0% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | −27.2% | 2.1% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 8.5% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 11.4% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 16.7% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 16.5% | 85.8% (better) |
| Operating margin | −100% | 33.7% (better) |
| Net margin | −87.2% | 32.5% (better) |
| FCF margin | −9.6% | 35.2% (better) |
| Return on equity | −45.9% | 14.9% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | −65.8% | 26.7% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 0.01 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | −3.18 |
| Interest coverage | −55.9× | 204× (better) |
| Current ratio | 8.18 (better) | 3.85 |
| Altman Z-score | – | 10.46 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 1.1% |
| Payout ratio | – | 21.6% |
| Buyback yield | – | 1.3% |
| Shareholder yield | – | 2.4% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | – | 36.7% |
| Held by insiders | – | 26.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | – | −$1.6M |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 8.9% |
Go deeper
- PAVS stock overview
- PAVS income statement
- PAVS valuation and score
- TRAK stock overview
- TRAK income statement
- TRAK valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.