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).
1 800 FLOWERS COM INC vs Sally Beauty Holdings, Inc. — Side-by-side quantitative comparison
Based on our 6-factor quantitative model, Sally Beauty Holdings, Inc. (SBH) is the stronger stock with a composite score of 67.6/100 and a Buy rating, compared to 1 800 FLOWERS COM INC (FLWS) at 50.6/100 (Hold). SBH ranks #171 in our universe versus #1918 for FLWS, giving it an edge of 17.0 points across quality, value, momentum, investment, stability, and short interest factors.
For the Quality factor — which measures profitability and business quality through metrics like ROE, gross margins, and capital efficiency — FLWS leads at 88/100, while SBH trails at 83/100 (FLWS: 88/100, SBH: 83/100). The 5-point gap indicates a meaningful difference in quality characteristics between these stocks.
For the Value factor — which evaluates whether a stock is cheap or expensive relative to its earnings, book value, and cash flows — FLWS leads at 98/100, while SBH trails at 92/100 (FLWS: 98/100, SBH: 92/100). The 7-point gap indicates a meaningful difference in value characteristics between these stocks.
For the Momentum factor — which captures price trends and institutional sentiment over the trailing 3-12 months — SBH leads at 77/100, while FLWS trails at 19/100 (SBH: 77/100, FLWS: 19/100). The 58-point gap indicates a meaningful difference in momentum characteristics between these stocks.
On the Investment factor, which assesses capital allocation quality including reinvestment rates and asset growth, these stocks are closely matched (SBH: 37/100, FLWS: 35/100). The narrow 2-point spread suggests similar investment profiles, so this factor alone is unlikely to be a decisive differentiator.
For the Stability factor — which measures financial health through leverage ratios and price volatility — SBH leads at 57/100, while FLWS trails at 24/100 (SBH: 57/100, FLWS: 24/100). The 32-point gap indicates a meaningful difference in stability characteristics between these stocks.
On the Short Interest factor, which tracks institutional bearish positioning and potential risk from elevated short selling, these stocks are closely matched (SBH: 25/100, FLWS: 22/100). The narrow 3-point spread suggests similar short interest profiles, so this factor alone is unlikely to be a decisive differentiator.
Based on our 6-factor model, Sally Beauty Holdings, Inc. (SBH) is utilizing a stronger overall profile than FLWS, with a Composite Score of 68 vs 51. SBH holds a moderate edge, particularly in Momentum and Stability, though both stocks have merits.
| Overall Rating | ||
| Composite Score | 68 | 51 |
| Rank | #171 | #1,918 |
| Stars | 4 / 5 | 3 / 5 |
| Action | Buy | Hold |
| Factor Scores | ||
| Quality | 83 | 88 |
| Value | 92 | 98 |
| Momentum | 77 | 19 |
| Stability | 57 | 24 |
| Investment | 37 | 35 |
| Short Interest | 25 | 22 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E Ratio | 5.11 | 0.91 |
| P/B Ratio | 1.22 | 0.89 |
| P/S Ratio | 0.25 | 0.09 |
| EV/EBITDA | 2.26 | 0.71 |
| Dividend Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Profitability | ||
| ROE | 27.5% | 42.0% |
| ROA | 6.9% | 15.7% |
| Gross Margin | 51.6% | 42.1% |
| Operating Margin | 8.9% | 10.6% |
| Net Margin | 5.3% | 10.1% |
| Growth & Risk | ||
| Revenue Growth | -0.4% | -9.4% |
| Debt/Equity | 177.00 | 51.00 |
| Beta | 0.85 | 1.15 |
| Market | ||
| Market Cap | $1.61B | $258M |
Based on our 6-factor quantitative model, SBH currently has the higher composite score (67.6/100, Buy) and ranks #171 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.
FLWS has the higher value score at 98/100 compared to SBH at 92/100. 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.