Federated Hermes vs Houlihan Lokey
FHI and HLI side by side, both in services allied with the exchange of securities. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How FHI and HLI compare
Houlihan Lokey is the larger company, worth 2.2 times as much as Federated Hermes ($9.6B against $4.4B).
On earnings, Federated Hermes is cheaper: it trades at 10.6× trailing earnings, against 23.1× for Houlihan Lokey.
Federated Hermes grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (13.2% versus −0.39% for Houlihan Lokey).
Federated Hermes keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 21.3% compared with 15.8% at Houlihan Lokey.
Both pay dividends: Federated Hermes yields 2.5% and Houlihan Lokey 1.9%.
Federated Hermes scores higher on the StockData Score (23 against 16 for Houlihan Lokey), 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 | FHI | HLI |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $4.4B | $9.6B |
| Share price | $58.48 | $138.00 |
| Change, 1 year | 22.7% | −30.4% |
| Change, 5 years | 69.0% | 18.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.68 | 0.90 |
| Employees | 2,091 | 2,600 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 23 (better) | 16 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 2 |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Dividend score | 3 | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 10.6× (better) | 23.1× |
| P/S | 2.2× (better) | 3.8× |
| P/B | 3.4× (better) | 4.2× |
| EV/EBITDA | 7.3× (better) | 15.9× |
| P/FCF | 11.3× (better) | 24.0× |
| PEG | 0.43 (better) | 1.27 |
| FCF yield | 8.8% (better) | 4.2% |
| Fair value | $76.31 | $123.78 |
| Margin of safety | 23.4% (better) | −11.5% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 13.2% (better) | −0.39% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.5% | 11.4% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 10.1% (better) | −5.4% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 15.7% (better) | −3.9% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 9.7% (better) | 6.5% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 27.8% (better) | 20.3% |
| Net margin | 21.3% (better) | 15.8% |
| FCF margin | 19.6% (better) | 15.7% |
| Return on equity | 33.9% (better) | 17.7% |
| Return on invested capital | 51.0% (better) | 27.2% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Current ratio | 2.48 | – |
| Altman Z-score | 5.35 | 5.40 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.5% (better) | 1.9% |
| Payout ratio | 26.1% | 46.4% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | −8.6% | – |
| Buyback yield | 6.0% (better) | 2.5% |
| Shareholder yield | 8.5% (better) | 4.3% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 89.1% | 80.7% |
| Held by insiders | 4.3% | 49.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$13.0M | −$1.6M (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 5.7% | 6.8% |
Go deeper
- FHI stock overview
- FHI income statement
- FHI valuation and score
- HLI stock overview
- HLI income statement
- HLI valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.