FTI Consulting vs Huron Consulting
FCN and HURN side by side, both in management and public relations services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How FCN and HURN compare
FTI Consulting is the larger company, worth 2.0 times as much as Huron Consulting ($5.4B against $2.7B).
On earnings, FTI Consulting is cheaper: it trades at 24.6× trailing earnings, against 25.2× for Huron Consulting.
Huron Consulting grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (13.6% versus 7.8% for FTI Consulting).
Huron Consulting keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 6.4% compared with 5.9% at FTI Consulting.
Huron Consulting scores higher on the StockData Score (14 against 11 for FTI Consulting), 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 | FCN | HURN |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $5.4B | $2.7B |
| Share price | $197.21 | $168.16 |
| Change, 1 year | 21.1% | 1.2% |
| Change, 5 years | 29.6% | 239% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.11 | 0.47 |
| Employees | 8,118 | 305 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 11 | 14 (better) |
| Valuation score | 1 | 1 |
| Growth score | 2 | 5 (better) |
| Performance score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 24.6× (better) | 25.2× |
| P/S | 1.4× (better) | 1.5× |
| P/B | 4.1× (better) | 7.0× |
| EV/EBITDA | 15.3× (better) | 15.5× |
| P/FCF | 15.2× (better) | 16.6× |
| PEG | 3.16 | 1.48 (better) |
| FCF yield | 6.6% (better) | 6.0% |
| Fair value | $168.19 | $153.39 |
| Margin of safety | −17.3% | −9.6% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 7.8% | 13.6% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.0% | 14.3% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −12.3% | 9.9% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 2.0% | 16.4% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 7.8% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 32.2% | 34.0% (better) |
| Operating margin | 8.8% | 10.3% (better) |
| Net margin | 5.9% | 6.4% (better) |
| FCF margin | 8.9% | 8.9% (better) |
| Return on equity | 15.2% | 26.9% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 12.4% (better) | 12.3% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.64 (better) | 2.16 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.90 (better) | 3.57 |
| Interest coverage | 9.0× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.72 (better) | 1.71 |
| Altman Z-score | 3.81 (better) | 3.42 |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Buyback yield | 12.9% (better) | 8.9% |
| Shareholder yield | 12.9% (better) | 8.9% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 112% | 99.3% |
| Held by insiders | 2.5% | 2.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$342K (better) | −$6.4M |
| Short interest, % of float | 9.9% | 4.7% |
Go deeper
- FCN stock overview
- FCN income statement
- FCN valuation and score
- HURN stock overview
- HURN income statement
- HURN valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.