IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: Blank Capital Research ("BCR") is a technology platform, not a registered investment advisor or broker-dealer. The algorithmically generated signals, scores, and rankings provided on this site ("God Mode" Signals) are for informational and research purposes only and do not constitute financial advice, investment recommendations, or an offer to sell or solicit an offer to buy any securities.
HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS: The "timing scores" and "regime signals" displayed are based on quantitative models. Hypothetical or simulated performance results have certain inherent limitations. Unlike an actual performance record, simulated results do not represent actual trading. Also, since the trades have not actually been executed, the results may have under-or-over compensated for the impact, if any, of certain market factors, such as lack of liquidity.
RISK OF LOSS: Trading in financial markets involves a high degree of risk and may result in the loss of your entire investment. Data provided by third-party sources (Intrinio, Snowflake) is believed to be reliable but is not guaranteed for accuracy or completeness. Past performance is not indicative of future results.
© 2026 Blank Capital Research. All rights reserved. System Version: Aegis V8 (God Mode).
Carlyle Secured Lending, Inc. vs SARATOGA INVESTMENT CORP. — Side-by-side quantitative comparison
SAR and CGBD are remarkably close in our quantitative rankings. SARATOGA INVESTMENT CORP. holds a slight edge with a composite score of 55.3/100 (Hold) versus Carlyle Secured Lending, Inc. at 53.4/100 (Hold). With a spread of just 1.9 points, the difference is marginal — investors should weigh qualitative factors like management quality, competitive positioning, and industry outlook to make a final decision.
For the Quality factor — which measures profitability and business quality through metrics like ROE, gross margins, and capital efficiency — CGBD leads at 72/100, while SAR trails at 30/100 (CGBD: 72/100, SAR: 30/100). The 43-point gap indicates a meaningful difference in quality characteristics between these stocks.
On the Value factor, which evaluates whether a stock is cheap or expensive relative to its earnings, book value, and cash flows, these stocks are closely matched (SAR: 69/100, CGBD: 67/100). The narrow 2-point spread suggests similar value profiles, so this factor alone is unlikely to be a decisive differentiator.
For the Momentum factor — which captures price trends and institutional sentiment over the trailing 3-12 months — SAR leads at 85/100, while CGBD trails at 40/100 (SAR: 85/100, CGBD: 40/100). The 45-point gap indicates a meaningful difference in momentum characteristics between these stocks.
For the Investment factor — which assesses capital allocation quality including reinvestment rates and asset growth — CGBD leads at 41/100, while SAR trails at 28/100 (CGBD: 41/100, SAR: 28/100). The 13-point gap indicates a meaningful difference in investment characteristics between these stocks.
For the Stability factor — which measures financial health through leverage ratios and price volatility — SAR leads at 78/100, while CGBD trails at 51/100 (SAR: 78/100, CGBD: 51/100). The 26-point gap indicates a meaningful difference in stability characteristics between these stocks.
For the Short Interest factor — which tracks institutional bearish positioning and potential risk from elevated short selling — CGBD leads at 44/100, while SAR trails at 32/100 (CGBD: 44/100, SAR: 32/100). The 12-point gap indicates a meaningful difference in short interest characteristics between these stocks.
Based on our 6-factor model, SARATOGA INVESTMENT CORP. (SAR) is utilizing a stronger overall profile than CGBD, with a Composite Score of 55 vs 53. The comparison is extremely close. While SAR leads slightly on Momentum, CGBD remains a competitive alternative.
| Overall Rating | ||
| Composite Score | 55 | 53 |
| Rank | #1,225 | #1,469 |
| Stars | 3 / 5 | 3 / 5 |
| Action | Hold | Hold |
| Factor Scores | ||
| Quality | 30 | 72 |
| Value | 69 | 67 |
| Momentum | 85 | 40 |
| Stability | 78 | 51 |
| Investment | 28 | 41 |
| Short Interest | 32 | 44 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E Ratio | 1.37 | 14.17 |
| P/B Ratio | 0.88 | 0.76 |
| P/S Ratio | 2.50 | 3.52 |
| EV/EBITDA | 2.32 | 6.08 |
| Dividend Yield | 17.0% | 13.6% |
| Profitability | ||
| ROE | 43.6% | 6.8% |
| ROA | 22.2% | 2.0% |
| Gross Margin | — | 100.0% |
| Operating Margin | — | 73.2% |
| Net Margin | 182.5% | 24.8% |
| Growth & Risk | ||
| Revenue Growth | -10.7% | 18.0% |
| Debt/Equity | 263.00 | 111.00 |
| Beta | 0.61 | 0.70 |
| Market | ||
| Market Cap | $362M | $911M |
Based on our 6-factor quantitative model, SAR currently has the higher composite score (55.3/100, Hold) and ranks #1225 in our universe. However, the "better" stock depends on your investment goals, risk tolerance, and time horizon. We recommend reviewing the full factor breakdown above before making a decision.
Our comparison analyzes six quantitative factors: Quality (profitability and business strength, 30% weight), Momentum (price trends, 25%), Value (valuation attractiveness, 15%), Investment (capital allocation, 10%), Stability (financial health, 10%), and Short Interest (institutional positioning, 10%). Each factor is scored 0-100 and combined into a composite score.
SAR has the higher value score at 69/100 compared to CGBD at 67/100. A higher value score indicates the stock trades at a more attractive valuation relative to its earnings, book value, and cash flows.
Our stock rankings and comparisons are updated daily using the latest available market data, financial statements, and price information. Factor scores reflect the most recent quarterly filings and trailing price data.