COMPARE · Data as of August 28, 2026
FUTU vs PURR
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. FUTU scored 81.0, PURR scored 78.0 — FUTU leads.
Compare another set
FUTU
Futu Holdings Limited
65.9Fin
$124.26 · $17.4B
Strength gap
1.6
PURR leads
PURR
Hyperliquid Strategies Inc.
67.5Fin
$11.61 · $2.3B
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestPURR3.6x
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Fundamentals, head-to-head
FUTU
PURR
12.4xB+
P/E
3.6xA
30.5%A
ROE
32.6%A
3.48C
P/B
1.94B
2.1%B
Yield
0.0%C
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
FUTUFutu Holdings Limited
Why now
Capital Markets · market cap $17.4b. Down 39% from 52-week high of $202.53 — deep drawdown territory. PEG 0.59 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 18 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $161.00 (implying +30% upside).
Moat
Net margin 46% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 31% — 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
Down 39% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Duration mismatch — the asset and liability books reprice on different schedules; a rapid move in rates either direction can compress net interest margin before management can reposition.
PURRHyperliquid Strategies Inc.
Why now
Capital Markets · market cap $2.3b. 18% off the 52-week high of $14.14. PEG 0.01 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 3 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $13.05 (implying +12% upside).
Moat
ROE 33% — 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
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 seconds
Not 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.