LPL Financial vs Schwab Charles
LPLA and SCHW side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How LPLA and SCHW compare
Schwab Charles is the larger company, worth 6.8 times as much as LPL Financial ($152B against $22.3B).
On earnings, Schwab Charles is cheaper: it trades at 16.0× trailing earnings, against 16.3× for LPL Financial.
LPL Financial grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (31.0% versus 20.3% for Schwab Charles).
Schwab Charles keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 38.8% compared with 6.8% at LPL Financial.
Both pay dividends: LPL Financial yields 0.42% and Schwab Charles 1.4%.
LPL Financial scores higher on the StockData Score (17 against 12 for Schwab Charles), 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 | LPLA | SCHW |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $22.3B | $152B |
| Share price | $283.74 | $88.05 |
| Change, 1 year | −17.4% | −6.9% |
| Change, 5 years | 68.7% | 8.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.90 | 1.06 |
| Employees | 10K | 10K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 17 (better) | 12 |
| Valuation score | 6 (better) | 2 |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 4 | 4 |
| Health score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Dividend score | 4 | 4 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 16.3× | 16.0× (better) |
| P/S | 1.1× (better) | 5.9× |
| P/B | 3.8× | 3.0× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 7.7× | – |
| P/FCF | 22.2× | 14.1× (better) |
| PEG | 9.93 | 1.61 (better) |
| FCF yield | 4.5% | 7.1% (better) |
| Fair value | $474.17 | $95.08 |
| Margin of safety | 40.2% (better) | 7.4% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 31.0% (better) | 20.3% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 23.7% (better) | 15.4% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 67.2% (better) | 38.6% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 60.5% (better) | 48.2% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 13.3% | 17.0% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Net margin | 6.8% | 38.8% (better) |
| FCF margin | 4.9% | 41.5% (better) |
| Return on equity | 25.7% (better) | 20.3% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 0.45 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.46 (better) | 0.38 |
| Piotroski F-score | 3 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.42% | 1.4% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 6.9% | 23.8% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 3.7% | 8.4% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 2.7% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 3.2% (better) | 1.4% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 106% | 83.4% |
| Held by insiders | 0.54% | 5.8% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$7.7M (better) | −$322M |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 | 9 (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.5% | 1.2% |
Go deeper
- LPLA stock overview
- LPLA income statement
- LPLA valuation and score
- SCHW stock overview
- SCHW income statement
- SCHW valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.