BGC vs Nasdaq
BGC and NDAQ side by side, both in security & commodity brokers, dealers, exchanges & services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How BGC and NDAQ compare
Nasdaq is the larger company, worth 11 times as much as BGC ($59.4B against $5.4B).
On earnings, BGC is cheaper: it trades at 27.9× trailing earnings, against 31.0× for Nasdaq.
BGC grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (27.6% versus 7.7% for Nasdaq).
Nasdaq keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 22.5% compared with 6.0% at BGC.
Both pay dividends: BGC yields 0.70% and Nasdaq 1.1%.
Nasdaq scores higher on the StockData Score (18 against 15 for BGC), 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 | BGC | NDAQ |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $5.4B | $59.4B |
| Share price | $11.42 | $106.23 |
| Change, 1 year | 23.2% | 24.4% |
| Change, 5 years | 122% | 49.7% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.99 | 0.89 |
| Employees | 4,560 | 9,525 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 15 | 18 (better) |
| Valuation score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 4 | 4 |
| Performance score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 2 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 27.9× (better) | 31.0× |
| P/S | 1.6× (better) | 6.8× |
| P/B | 4.9× (better) | 5.0× |
| EV/EBITDA | 17.4× (better) | 24.6× |
| P/FCF | 11.2× (better) | 30.4× |
| PEG | 0.83 (better) | 2.82 |
| FCF yield | 8.9% (better) | 3.3% |
| Fair value | $11.11 | $79.91 |
| Margin of safety | −2.8% (better) | −32.9% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 27.6% (better) | 7.7% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 7.4% | 8.0% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 33.6% (better) | 30.4% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 36.7% (better) | 31.9% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 20.9% (better) | 10.7% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | – | 64.2% |
| Operating margin | – | 29.5% |
| Net margin | 6.0% | 22.5% (better) |
| FCF margin | 14.7% | 22.3% (better) |
| Return on equity | 19.5% (better) | 16.5% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 10.3% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.60 | 0.73 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.65 (better) | 3.00 |
| Interest coverage | – | 7.4× |
| Current ratio | – | 1.01 |
| Altman Z-score | 1.11 | 3.48 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 9 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.70% | 1.1% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 19.5% | 32.3% |
| Years of dividend growth | 2 | 13 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | −14.0% | 10.1% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 4.1% (better) | 2.2% |
| Shareholder yield | 4.8% (better) | 3.3% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 65.4% | 84.7% |
| Held by insiders | 48.6% | 18.9% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$95.5K (better) | −$65.1M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 4.1% | 1.7% |
Go deeper
- BGC stock overview
- BGC income statement
- BGC valuation and score
- NDAQ stock overview
- NDAQ income statement
- NDAQ valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.