Aon vs Marsh & McLennan Companies
AON and MRSH side by side, both in insurance agents, brokers, and service. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How AON and MRSH compare
Marsh & McLennan Companies is the larger company, worth 1.4 times as much as Aon ($95.7B against $68.2B).
On earnings, Aon is cheaper: it trades at 17.7× trailing earnings, against 24.0× for Marsh & McLennan Companies.
Marsh & McLennan Companies grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (7.6% versus 4.9% for Aon).
Aon keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 22.3% compared with 14.2% at Marsh & McLennan Companies.
Both pay dividends: Aon yields 0.51% and Marsh & McLennan Companies 1.9%.
Aon scores higher on the StockData Score (21 against 13 for Marsh & McLennan Companies), 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 | AON | MRSH |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $68.2B | $95.7B |
| Share price | $321.67 | $200.62 |
| Change, 1 year | −1.3% | 11.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 11.5% | 24.3% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.58 | 0.61 |
| Employees | 60K | 95K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 21 (better) | 13 |
| Valuation score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 17.7× (better) | 24.0× |
| P/S | 3.9× | 3.4× (better) |
| P/B | 7.1× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 17.6× (better) | 17.8× |
| P/FCF | 21.0× (better) | 23.0× |
| PEG | 1.49 (better) | 2.04 |
| FCF yield | 4.8% (better) | 4.3% |
| Fair value | $477.23 | – |
| Margin of safety | 32.6% | – |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 4.9% | 7.6% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.2% | 9.4% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 50.4% (better) | −2.1% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 51.9% (better) | 0.12% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 15.0% | 16.4% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 26.5% (better) | 21.4% |
| Net margin | 22.3% (better) | 14.2% |
| FCF margin | 18.5% (better) | 14.6% |
| Return on equity | 44.9% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 15.5% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.56 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.94 | 2.90 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 6.2× | 6.3× (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.03 | 1.09 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.58 | 2.81 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.51% | 1.9% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 16.8% | 44.5% |
| Years of dividend growth | 14 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 10.3% | – |
| Buyback yield | 2.2% | 3.2% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 2.8% | 5.0% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 90.9% | 92.0% |
| Held by insiders | 0.91% | 0.10% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $75.8K (better) | −$18.9M |
| Superinvestors holding | 6 (better) | 2 |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.0% | 1.3% |
Go deeper
- AON stock overview
- AON income statement
- AON valuation and score
- MRSH stock overview
- MRSH income statement
- MRSH valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.