MLAB vs POAS

Mesa Laboratories, Inc. vs Phaos Technology Holdings (Caym — Valuation Comparison 2026

MLAB

Industrial Instruments For Measurement, Display, and Control
Mesa Laboratories, Inc.
Quality
8.6
out of 10
Value Trap
37
LOW
Price
$102.02
Last close
Models
12/13
Active
VS

POAS

Industrial Instruments For Measurement, Display, and Control
Phaos Technology Holdings (Caym
Quality
4.4
out of 10
Value Trap
Price
$0.52
Last close
Models
6/13
Active

Model-by-Model Comparison

ModelType MLAB Fair ValueMLAB Upside POAS Fair ValuePOAS Upside
Bayesian DCF Intrinsic $88.07 -13.7% $0.69 +31.9%
Earnings Power Value Intrinsic $528.65 +418.2%
EROIC Spread Intrinsic $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
First Chicago Scenario $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
Markov DDM Intrinsic $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
ML-RIV Intrinsic $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
PWERM Option-Based $121.65 +19.2% $2.68 +413.7%
Regime Cross-Sectional Relative $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
Sentiment SOTP Hybrid $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
CUCE Ensemble Ensemble $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
FTNN Topology Relative $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
RCMH-DCF Intrinsic $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
🔒

Unlock Full 13-Model Comparison

Access all valuation models for MLAB vs POAS — including EROIC Spread, First Chicago, Markov DDM, PWERM, and 7 more.

Access Full Analysis — From $27/mo →

MLAB vs POAS — Which Stock Is More Undervalued?

MLAB scores higher with a 8.6/10 quality rating vs POAS's 4.4/10. Both stocks are analyzed daily using SEC EDGAR filings across 13 independent models.

Comparing Mesa Laboratories, Inc. (MLAB) and Phaos Technology Holdings (Caym (POAS) across 13 institutional-grade valuation models reveals how each company's intrinsic value stacks up against its market price. CirclFi's engine processes SEC EDGAR 10-K and 10-Q filings, FRED macroeconomic data, and GDELT news sentiment to generate independent fair value estimates daily.

MLAB currently trades at $102.02 with a QOC of 8.6/10, while POAS trades at $0.52 with a QOC of 4.4/10.

Both companies are analyzed with models spanning intrinsic (Bayesian DCF, EPV), scenario-based (First Chicago), regime-switching (Markov DDM, RCMH-DCF), machine learning (ML-RIV, FTNN Topology), and ensemble methods (CUCE).