Douglas Elliman vs Marcus & Millichap
DOUG and MMI side by side, both in real estate. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How DOUG and MMI compare
Marcus & Millichap is the larger company, worth 5.9 times as much as Douglas Elliman ($918M against $155M).
On earnings, Douglas Elliman is cheaper: it trades at 2.6× trailing earnings, against 62.2× for Marcus & Millichap.
Marcus & Millichap grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (10.0% 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 1.8% at Marcus & Millichap.
Marcus & Millichap pays a dividend yielding 2.1%; Douglas Elliman does not pay one.
Douglas Elliman scores higher on the StockData Score (14 against 12 for Marcus & Millichap), 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 | DOUG | MMI |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $155M | $918M |
| Share price | $1.70 | $24.25 |
| Change, 1 year | −35.8% | −21.8% |
| Change, 5 years | – | −48.2% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.28 | 0.98 |
| Employees | 580 | 854 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 14 (better) | 12 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Health score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 2.6× (better) | 62.2× |
| P/S | 0.2× (better) | 1.1× |
| P/B | 0.9× (better) | 1.6× |
| EV/EBITDA | 0.5× (better) | 31.5× |
| P/FCF | – | 13.9× |
| FCF yield | −4.6% | 7.2% (better) |
| Fair value | $10.60 | $11.43 |
| Margin of safety | 84.0% (better) | −112% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −3.5% | 10.0% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 5.9% (better) | 1.0% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 5.3% (better) | 1.3% |
| Net margin | 5.7% (better) | 1.8% |
| FCF margin | −0.71% | 8.0% (better) |
| Return on equity | 39.1% (better) | 2.6% |
| Return on invested capital | 190% (better) | 1.9% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Interest coverage | 122× (better) | 17.2× |
| Current ratio | 1.63 | 2.79 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.74 | 4.67 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 2.1% |
| Payout ratio | – | 135% |
| Buyback yield | – | 4.7% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 6.7% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 53.1% | 60.4% |
| Held by insiders | 13.4% | 38.9% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | – | −$48.5K |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.1% | 3.7% |
Go deeper
- DOUG stock overview
- DOUG income statement
- DOUG valuation and score
- MMI stock overview
- MMI income statement
- MMI valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.