Cboe Global Markets vs Intercontinental Exchange
CBOE and ICE 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 CBOE and ICE compare
Intercontinental Exchange is the larger company, worth 2.7 times as much as Cboe Global Markets ($94.8B against $35.0B).
On earnings, Intercontinental Exchange is cheaper: it trades at 23.0× trailing earnings, against 23.9× for Cboe Global Markets.
Cboe Global Markets grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (14.3% versus 12.1% for Intercontinental Exchange).
Intercontinental Exchange keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 29.6% compared with 28.0% at Cboe Global Markets.
Both pay dividends: Cboe Global Markets yields 0.69% and Intercontinental Exchange 1.2%.
Cboe Global Markets scores higher on the StockData Score (23 against 19 for Intercontinental Exchange), 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 | CBOE | ICE |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $35.0B | $94.8B |
| Share price | $335.53 | $168.85 |
| Change, 1 year | 44.2% | 12.1% |
| Change, 5 years | 152% | 24.1% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.25 | 0.80 |
| Employees | 1,661 | 13K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 23 (better) | 19 |
| Valuation score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Dividend score | 4 | 4 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 23.9× | 23.0× (better) |
| P/S | 6.6× (better) | 6.7× |
| P/B | 5.9× | 3.2× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 16.6× | 16.5× (better) |
| P/FCF | 13.9× (better) | 18.0× |
| PEG | 0.35 (better) | 0.75 |
| FCF yield | 7.2% (better) | 5.6% |
| Fair value | $323.98 | $173.33 |
| Margin of safety | −3.6% | 2.6% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 14.3% (better) | 12.1% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 6.6% | 8.9% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 50.6% (better) | 31.6% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 51.0% (better) | 33.5% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 19.5% (better) | 8.9% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 53.9% | – |
| Operating margin | 36.4% | 40.6% (better) |
| Net margin | 28.0% | 29.6% (better) |
| FCF margin | 47.9% (better) | 37.6% |
| Return on equity | 27.4% (better) | 14.2% |
| Return on invested capital | 36.2% (better) | 8.5% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.24 (better) | 0.88 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.62 | 3.49 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 36.3× (better) | 6.8× |
| Current ratio | 1.61 (better) | 1.03 |
| Altman Z-score | 5.82 (better) | 0.78 |
| Piotroski F-score | 9 (better) | 7 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.69% | 1.2% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 21.4% | 27.8% |
| Years of dividend growth | 11 | 13 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 11.6% (better) | 9.9% |
| Buyback yield | 0.38% | 2.1% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 1.1% | 3.3% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 89.2% | 93.1% |
| Held by insiders | 0.25% | 0.63% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$2.3M (better) | −$91.3M |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 5 (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.2% | 1.2% |
Go deeper
- CBOE stock overview
- CBOE income statement
- CBOE valuation and score
- ICE stock overview
- ICE income statement
- ICE valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.