Compass vs Douglas Elliman
COMP and DOUG side by side, both in real estate. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How COMP and DOUG compare
Compass is the larger company, worth 49 times as much as Douglas Elliman ($7.8B against $158M).
On earnings, Douglas Elliman is cheaper: it trades at 2.6× trailing earnings, against 73.3× for Compass.
Compass grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (89.8% versus −3.5% for Douglas Elliman).
Douglas Elliman keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 5.7% compared with 1.1% at Compass.
Douglas Elliman scores higher on the StockData Score (14 against 6 for Compass), 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 | COMP | DOUG |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $7.8B | $158M |
| Share price | $10.26 | $1.74 |
| Change, 1 year | 16.7% | −33.1% |
| Change, 5 years | −1.6% | – |
| Beta (5Y) | 2.24 | 1.28 |
| Employees | 3,200 | 580 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 6 | 14 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 5 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 1 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 73.3× | 2.6× (better) |
| P/S | 0.6× | 0.2× (better) |
| P/B | 2.5× | 0.9× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 33.0× | 0.6× (better) |
| P/FCF | 26.4× | – |
| FCF yield | 3.8% (better) | −4.5% |
| Fair value | $2.62 | $10.69 |
| Margin of safety | −292% | 83.7% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 89.8% (better) | −3.5% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 13.3% (better) | 5.9% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | −1.4% | 5.3% (better) |
| Net margin | 1.1% | 5.7% (better) |
| FCF margin | 2.3% (better) | −0.71% |
| Return on equity | 6.8% | 39.1% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | −4.8% | 190% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.00 (better) | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 7.53 | – |
| Interest coverage | −1.5× | 122× (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.12 | 1.63 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.86 | 2.74 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 93.5% | 53.1% |
| Held by insiders | 6.8% | 13.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$2.5M | – |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 6.9% | 3.1% |
Go deeper
- COMP stock overview
- COMP income statement
- COMP valuation and score
- DOUG stock overview
- DOUG income statement
- DOUG valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.