SWF
$7.7b HINs
128k users
Average HIN value $60k
Pearler
$0.5b HINs
68k users (if their counting method is the same)
Average HIN value $7k
I expect Stake to be more similar to Pearler. Lots of small portfolios, but more scale than Pearler.
So which is the more valuable company? SWF's larger HIN values means more client cash, meaning more interest revenue. Plus the users completing trades even with the higher brokerage, means higher revenue again.
As you could imagine, if Pearler was charging more, then their user count would not have grown to where it is. They might instead have 10k users and $0.3b HINs with $30k average HIN value.
If Pearler offer free trades as a promotion, I'd expect it to hit Stake primarily, and Selfwealth secondarily. They'll be competing for the 'most cost conscious' user segment, which Stake is already taking from Selfwealth, so it'll just mean Stake and Pearler both competing for that same segment.
On a scale of competitor risk -
Commsec - 10/10 for market power, 3/10 for agility. (slow incumbent, but with Commsec Pocket)
Selfwealth - 5/10, 5/10 (losing out on the 'budget' client segment, but is that such a big loss? Some problems with innovating/delivering.)
Stake - 5/10, 8/10 (huge cash balance, burning cash, free trades promotions - not sure whether they can raise that sort of cash again)
Superhero - 3/10, 6/10 (possibly in financial trouble - their parent/partner Swyftx is raising short-term debt and firing staff)
Pearler - 2/10, 6/10 (small scale, and the same client segment as Stake and Superhero)
Expand
