Arch Capital vs Berkley W R
ACGLN and WRB side by side, both in fire, marine, and casualty insurance. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How ACGLN and WRB compare
Berkley W R is the larger company, worth 5.4 times as much as Arch Capital ($27.9B against $5.2B).
On earnings, Arch Capital is cheaper: it trades at 1.2× trailing earnings, against 15.9× for Berkley W R.
Berkley W R grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (1.5% versus −3.9% for Arch Capital).
Arch Capital keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 23.3% compared with 12.5% at Berkley W R.
Both pay dividends: Arch Capital yields 7.5% and Berkley W R 2.5%.
Arch Capital scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 9 for Berkley W R), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | ACGLN | WRB |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $5.2B | $27.9B |
| Share price | $15.15 | $75.23 |
| Change, 1 year | −13.8% | 0.68% |
| Change, 5 years | −41.1% | 108% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.32 | 0.29 |
| Employees | 8,000 | 8,804 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 16 (better) | 9 |
| Valuation score | 6 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Health score | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 1.2× (better) | 15.9× |
| P/S | 0.3× (better) | 1.9× |
| P/B | 0.2× (better) | 2.9× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 10.8× |
| P/FCF | 0.9× | – |
| PEG | 0.03 (better) | 1.50 |
| FCF yield | 109% | – |
| Fair value | $70.98 | $58.27 |
| Margin of safety | 78.7% (better) | −29.1% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −3.9% | 1.5% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 18.6% (better) | 12.7% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 6.9% (better) | −2.3% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 14.5% (better) | −0.63% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 28.4% | 29.0% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Net margin | 23.3% (better) | 12.5% |
| FCF margin | 30.0% | – |
| Return on equity | 18.7% | 19.2% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Altman Z-score | 0.78 | 1.23 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 7.5% (better) | 2.5% |
| Payout ratio | – | 37.9% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 55.0% |
| Buyback yield | 80.9% (better) | 2.3% |
| Shareholder yield | 88.4% (better) | 4.8% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 91.6% | 75.1% |
| Held by insiders | 5.5% | 67.9% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$28.0M | $705M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 3 |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 10.2% |
Go deeper
- ACGLN stock overview
- ACGLN income statement
- ACGLN valuation and score
- WRB stock overview
- WRB income statement
- WRB valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.