AGM Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Horizon Technology Finance has a net margin of 55.19% compared to Federal Agricultural Mortgage's net margin of 80.24%. Federal Agricultural Mortgage's return on equity of 13.69% beat Horizon Technology Finance's return on equity of -1.15%.

Federal Agricultural Mortgage has a consensus price target of $227.00, signalling upside risk potential of 13.7%. On the other hand Horizon Technology Finance has an analysts' consensus of $9.82 which suggests that it could grow by 6.64%. Given that Federal Agricultural Mortgage has higher upside potential than Horizon Technology Finance, analysts believe Federal Agricultural Mortgage is more attractive than Horizon Technology Finance.

Federal Agricultural Mortgage has a beta of 1.089, which suggesting that the stock is 8.878% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Horizon Technology Finance has a beta of 1.217, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 21.716%.

Federal Agricultural Mortgage has a quarterly dividend of $1.40 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.92%. Horizon Technology Finance offers a yield of 14.33% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.11 per share. Federal Agricultural Mortgage pays 37.41% of its earnings as a dividend. Horizon Technology Finance pays out -235.81% of its earnings as a dividend. Federal Agricultural Mortgage's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Federal Agricultural Mortgage quarterly revenues are $90.3M, which are larger than Horizon Technology Finance quarterly revenues of $9.1M. Federal Agricultural Mortgage's net income of $49.8M is higher than Horizon Technology Finance's net income of $7.3M. Notably, Federal Agricultural Mortgage's price-to-earnings ratio is 12.33x while Horizon Technology Finance's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Federal Agricultural Mortgage is 5.86x versus 75.94x for Horizon Technology Finance. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Medallion Financial has a net margin of 55.19% compared to Federal Agricultural Mortgage's net margin of 17.62%. Federal Agricultural Mortgage's return on equity of 13.69% beat Medallion Financial's return on equity of 9.63%.

Federal Agricultural Mortgage has a consensus price target of $227.00, signalling upside risk potential of 13.7%. On the other hand Medallion Financial has an analysts' consensus of $12.00 which suggests that it could grow by 28.07%. Given that Medallion Financial has higher upside potential than Federal Agricultural Mortgage, analysts believe Medallion Financial is more attractive than Federal Agricultural Mortgage.

Federal Agricultural Mortgage has a beta of 1.089, which suggesting that the stock is 8.878% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Medallion Financial has a beta of 2.090, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 108.952%.

Federal Agricultural Mortgage has a quarterly dividend of $1.40 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.92%. Medallion Financial offers a yield of 4.38% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.11 per share. Federal Agricultural Mortgage pays 37.41% of its earnings as a dividend. Medallion Financial pays out 13.99% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Federal Agricultural Mortgage quarterly revenues are $90.3M, which are larger than Medallion Financial quarterly revenues of $48.9M. Federal Agricultural Mortgage's net income of $49.8M is higher than Medallion Financial's net income of $8.6M. Notably, Federal Agricultural Mortgage's price-to-earnings ratio is 12.33x while Medallion Financial's PE ratio is 5.54x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Federal Agricultural Mortgage is 5.86x versus 1.14x for Medallion Financial. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

PRA Group has a net margin of 55.19% compared to Federal Agricultural Mortgage's net margin of 9.58%. Federal Agricultural Mortgage's return on equity of 13.69% beat PRA Group's return on equity of 3.55%.

Federal Agricultural Mortgage has a consensus price target of $227.00, signalling upside risk potential of 13.7%. On the other hand PRA Group has an analysts' consensus of $29.33 which suggests that it could grow by 41.91%. Given that PRA Group has higher upside potential than Federal Agricultural Mortgage, analysts believe PRA Group is more attractive than Federal Agricultural Mortgage.

Federal Agricultural Mortgage has a beta of 1.089, which suggesting that the stock is 8.878% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison PRA Group has a beta of 1.485, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 48.514%.

Federal Agricultural Mortgage has a quarterly dividend of $1.40 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.92%. PRA Group offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Federal Agricultural Mortgage pays 37.41% of its earnings as a dividend. PRA Group pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend. Federal Agricultural Mortgage's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Federal Agricultural Mortgage quarterly revenues are $90.3M, which are smaller than PRA Group quarterly revenues of $283.6M. Federal Agricultural Mortgage's net income of $49.8M is higher than PRA Group's net income of $27.2M. Notably, Federal Agricultural Mortgage's price-to-earnings ratio is 12.33x while PRA Group's PE ratio is 18.79x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Federal Agricultural Mortgage is 5.86x versus 0.78x for PRA Group. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.