Brown & Brown vs Willis Towers Watson
BRO and WTW 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 BRO and WTW compare
Willis Towers Watson is the larger company, worth 1.3 times as much as Brown & Brown ($30.1B against $23.3B).
On earnings, Willis Towers Watson is cheaper: it trades at 19.7× trailing earnings, against 20.8× for Brown & Brown.
Brown & Brown grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (34.2% versus 4.8% for Willis Towers Watson).
Brown & Brown keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 17.7% compared with 15.2% at Willis Towers Watson.
Both pay dividends: Brown & Brown yields 0.95% and Willis Towers Watson 1.2%.
Willis Towers Watson scores higher on the StockData Score (18 against 14 for Brown & Brown), 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 | BRO | WTW |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $23.3B | $30.1B |
| Share price | $69.76 | $324.42 |
| Change, 1 year | −13.1% | 2.2% |
| Change, 5 years | 12.6% | 40.3% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.66 | 0.56 |
| Employees | 23K | 47K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 14 | 18 (better) |
| Valuation score | 2 | 5 (better) |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Dividend score | 4 | 4 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 20.8× | 19.7× (better) |
| P/S | 3.4× | 2.9× (better) |
| P/B | – | 3.9× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 15.4× |
| P/FCF | 16.1× (better) | 17.3× |
| PEG | 2.07 | 0.90 (better) |
| FCF yield | 6.2% (better) | 5.8% |
| Fair value | – | $392.20 |
| Margin of safety | – | 17.3% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 34.2% (better) | 4.8% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 17.7% (better) | 2.4% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 19.8% (better) | −26.1% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −3.2% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 13.3% | 16.3% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | – | 22.0% |
| Net margin | 17.7% (better) | 15.2% |
| FCF margin | 21.3% (better) | 17.0% |
| Return on equity | – | 20.2% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 15.4% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 0.84 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 2.02 |
| Interest coverage | – | 7.5× |
| Current ratio | 1.13 (better) | 1.10 |
| Altman Z-score | 1.43 | 1.43 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.95% | 1.2% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 18.2% | 22.8% |
| Years of dividend growth | 10 (better) | 9 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 12.1% (better) | 6.0% |
| Buyback yield | – | 4.4% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.95% | 5.6% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 87.8% | 103% |
| Held by insiders | 12.2% | 0.41% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $164K | $911K (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 | 2 |
| Short interest, % of float | 4.8% | 3.2% |
Go deeper
- BRO stock overview
- BRO income statement
- BRO valuation and score
- WTW stock overview
- WTW income statement
- WTW valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.