CME vs Intercontinental Exchange
CME 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 CME and ICE compare
CME and Intercontinental Exchange are about the same size, with market caps of $109B and $94.8B.
On earnings, Intercontinental Exchange is cheaper: it trades at 23.0× trailing earnings, against 25.7× for CME.
Intercontinental Exchange grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (12.1% versus 5.1% for CME).
Both pay dividends: CME yields 3.7% and Intercontinental Exchange 1.2%.
Intercontinental Exchange scores higher on the StockData Score (19 against 9 for CME), 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 | CME | ICE |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $109B | $94.8B |
| Share price | $303.14 | $168.85 |
| Change, 1 year | 15.9% | 12.1% |
| Change, 5 years | 36.7% | 24.1% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.36 | 0.80 |
| Employees | 3,875 | 13K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 9 | 19 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 5 (better) |
| Growth score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Performance score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Dividend score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 25.7× | 23.0× (better) |
| P/S | 16.1× | 6.7× (better) |
| P/B | 4.1× | 3.2× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 24.2× | 16.5× (better) |
| P/FCF | 25.9× | 18.0× (better) |
| PEG | 1.75 | 0.75 (better) |
| FCF yield | 3.9% | 5.6% (better) |
| Fair value | $250.81 | $173.33 |
| Margin of safety | −20.9% | 2.6% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 5.1% | 12.1% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 6.0% | 8.9% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 31.6% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 14.1% | 33.5% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 13.7% (better) | 8.9% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 65.1% (better) | 40.6% |
| Net margin | – | 29.6% |
| FCF margin | 62.2% (better) | 37.6% |
| Return on equity | – | 14.2% |
| Return on invested capital | 13.5% (better) | 8.5% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.88 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 3.49 |
| Interest coverage | – | 6.8× |
| Current ratio | 1.02 | 1.03 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 0.56 | 0.78 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 3.7% (better) | 1.2% |
| Payout ratio | – | 27.8% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 13 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | −3.3% | 9.9% (better) |
| Buyback yield | – | 2.1% |
| Shareholder yield | 3.7% (better) | 3.3% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 89.5% | 93.1% |
| Held by insiders | 0.34% | 0.63% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$30.4M (better) | −$91.3M |
| Superinvestors holding | 5 | 5 |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.5% | 1.2% |
Go deeper
- CME stock overview
- CME income statement
- CME 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.