COMPARE · Data as of October 9, 2026
MARA vs VIRT
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. MARA scored 77.0, VIRT scored 80.0 — VIRT leads.
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Fundamentals, head-to-head
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
The companies
MARAMARA Holdings, Inc.
Capital Markets · $9.65 · beta 5.35
Why now
Capital Markets · market cap $3.7b. Down 59% from 52-week high of $23.45 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +38% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.10 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 13 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $18.61 (implying +93% upside).
Moat
Financial moat — scale of deposit base / underwriting franchise plus regulatory capital advantages. The largest players compound book value through cycles that erase smaller competitors.
Risk
Down 59% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Beta 5.35 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return. Balance-sheet financial — book value, net interest margin, and credit loss provisions are the lever points; a rates regime change or a deterioration in the loan book moves the stock more than EPS does.
VIRTVirtu Financial, Inc.
Capital Markets · $57.51 · beta 0.65
Why now
Capital Markets · market cap $5.1b. 16% off the 52-week high of $68.76. Revenue growing +26% — in hypergrowth territory. 7 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $69.43 (implying +21% upside).
Moat
Net margin 17% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 54% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. Financial moat — scale of deposit base / underwriting franchise plus regulatory capital advantages. The largest players compound book value through cycles that erase smaller competitors.
Risk
D/E 4.15 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Balance-sheet financial — book value, net interest margin, and credit loss provisions are the lever points; a rates regime change or a deterioration in the loan book moves the stock more than EPS does.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
Generating verdict…
typically 5–10 secondsNot investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See
terms and
methodology for full disclosures.
Common questions
Is VIRT or MARA the better stock?
VIRT scores higher: VIRT 80.0, MARA 77.0 out of 100 on the Bull Rankings quality-growth score, which blends business quality, growth and valuation into one number. A higher score means a stronger business at a more reasonable price — it is not a price target or a recommendation.
How are VIRT and MARA scored?
Each carries the same 0–100 quality-growth score used everywhere on the site, built from three pillars — quality (profitability and returns on capital), growth (revenue and earnings), and value (what you pay for them) — combined as a geometric mean, so a weak pillar cannot be papered over by a strong one.
How current is this comparison?
The whole universe is re-scored every trading day after the US market close, so the scores and fundamentals here reflect the latest published edition.