CNA Financial vs Everest
CNA and EG side by side, both in fire, marine, and casualty insurance. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CNA and EG compare
Everest is the larger company, worth 1.2 times as much as CNA Financial ($15.8B against $13.2B).
On earnings, Everest is cheaper: it trades at 8.7× trailing earnings, against 10.7× for CNA Financial.
CNA Financial grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (3.4% versus −8.7% for Everest).
Everest keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 11.7% compared with 8.2% at CNA Financial.
Both pay dividends: CNA Financial yields 8.0% and Everest 1.5%.
CNA Financial scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 13 for Everest), 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 | CNA | EG |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $13.2B | $15.8B |
| Share price | $48.68 | $410.97 |
| Change, 1 year | 10.5% | 32.8% |
| Change, 5 years | 6.2% | 50.2% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.40 | 0.40 |
| Employees | 6,600 | 3,064 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 16 (better) | 13 |
| Valuation score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Health score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 10.7× | 8.7× (better) |
| P/S | 0.9× (better) | 1.0× |
| P/B | 1.2× | 1.1× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 8.9× | – |
| P/FCF | 5.8× | – |
| PEG | 0.46 | 0.24 (better) |
| FCF yield | 17.1% | – |
| Fair value | $53.50 | $580.32 |
| Margin of safety | 9.0% | 29.2% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 3.4% (better) | −8.7% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 6.8% | 12.8% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 41.0% | 243% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 41.3% | 256% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 13.1% | 24.2% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Net margin | 8.2% | 11.7% (better) |
| FCF margin | 14.9% | – |
| Return on equity | 11.3% | 12.8% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.27 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.48 | – |
| Altman Z-score | 0.54 | 0.86 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 8.0% (better) | 1.5% |
| Payout ratio | 85.8% | 16.7% |
| Years of dividend growth | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 2.0% | 5.2% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 0.27% | 10.1% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 8.3% | 11.6% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 101% | 102% |
| Held by insiders | 0.53% | 1.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$2.7M | −$273K (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.4% | 4.4% |
Go deeper
- CNA stock overview
- CNA income statement
- CNA valuation and score
- EG stock overview
- EG income statement
- EG valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.