Intercontinental Exchange vs LPL Financial
ICE and LPLA side by side, both in security & commodity brokers, dealers, exchanges & services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How ICE and LPLA compare
Intercontinental Exchange is the larger company, worth 4.2 times as much as LPL Financial ($94.8B against $22.3B).
On earnings, LPL Financial is cheaper: it trades at 16.3× trailing earnings, against 23.0× for Intercontinental Exchange.
LPL Financial grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (31.0% versus 12.1% for Intercontinental Exchange).
Intercontinental Exchange keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 29.6% compared with 6.8% at LPL Financial.
Both pay dividends: Intercontinental Exchange yields 1.2% and LPL Financial 0.42%.
Intercontinental Exchange scores higher on the StockData Score (19 against 17 for LPL Financial), 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 | ICE | LPLA |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $94.8B | $22.3B |
| Share price | $168.85 | $283.74 |
| Change, 1 year | 12.1% | −17.4% |
| Change, 5 years | 24.1% | 68.7% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.80 | 0.90 |
| Employees | 13K | 10K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 19 (better) | 17 |
| Valuation score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 4 | 4 |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend score | 4 | 4 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 23.0× | 16.3× (better) |
| P/S | 6.7× | 1.1× (better) |
| P/B | 3.2× (better) | 3.8× |
| EV/EBITDA | 16.5× | 7.7× (better) |
| P/FCF | 18.0× (better) | 22.2× |
| PEG | 0.75 (better) | 9.93 |
| FCF yield | 5.6% (better) | 4.5% |
| Fair value | $173.33 | $474.17 |
| Margin of safety | 2.6% | 40.2% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 12.1% | 31.0% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 8.9% | 23.7% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 31.6% | 67.2% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 33.5% | 60.5% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 8.9% | 13.3% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 40.6% | – |
| Net margin | 29.6% (better) | 6.8% |
| FCF margin | 37.6% (better) | 4.9% |
| Return on equity | 14.2% | 25.7% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 8.5% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.88 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.49 | – |
| Interest coverage | 6.8× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.03 | – |
| Altman Z-score | 0.78 | 2.46 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 3 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.2% (better) | 0.42% |
| Payout ratio | 27.8% | 6.9% |
| Years of dividend growth | 13 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 9.9% (better) | 3.7% |
| Buyback yield | 2.1% | 2.7% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 3.3% (better) | 3.2% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 93.1% | 106% |
| Held by insiders | 0.63% | 0.54% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$91.3M | −$7.7M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 5 (better) | 2 |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.2% | 2.5% |
Go deeper
- ICE stock overview
- ICE income statement
- ICE valuation and score
- LPLA stock overview
- LPLA income statement
- LPLA valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.