Markel vs Berkley W R
MKL and WRB side by side, both in fire, marine, and casualty insurance. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How MKL and WRB compare
Berkley W R is the larger company, worth 1.2 times as much as Markel ($27.4B against $23.2B).
On earnings, Markel is cheaper: it trades at 10.4× trailing earnings, against 15.2× for Berkley W R.
Berkley W R grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (4.3% versus 3.5% for Markel).
Markel keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 14.7% compared with 12.9% at Berkley W R.
Berkley W R pays a dividend yielding 2.5%; Markel does not pay one.
Berkley W R scores higher on the StockData Score (9 against 7 for Markel), 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 | MKL | WRB |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $23.2B | $27.4B |
| Share price | $1869.82 | $73.86 |
| Change, 1 year | 2.4% | 3.4% |
| Change, 5 years | 42.4% | 106% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.56 | 0.29 |
| Employees | 23K | 8,804 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 7 | 9 (better) |
| Valuation score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Performance score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 10.4× (better) | 15.2× |
| P/S | 1.5× (better) | 1.8× |
| P/B | 1.2× (better) | 2.8× |
| EV/EBITDA | 6.4× (better) | 10.0× |
| P/FCF | 10.9× | – |
| PEG | – | 1.43 |
| FCF yield | 9.1% | – |
| Fair value | $2061.96 | $59.76 |
| Margin of safety | 9.3% (better) | −23.6% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 3.5% | 4.3% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.8% | 12.7% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 2.3% | 9.5% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 6.1% | 10.9% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 24.9% | 29.0% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 19.9% | – |
| Net margin | 14.7% (better) | 12.9% |
| FCF margin | 13.7% | – |
| Return on equity | 12.6% | 20.2% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 17.0% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Interest coverage | 15.2× | – |
| Altman Z-score | 0.94 | 1.22 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 2.5% |
| Payout ratio | – | 24.9% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 3 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 55.0% |
| Buyback yield | 2.3% | 2.3% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 2.3% | 4.9% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 79.1% | 75.1% |
| Held by insiders | 1.7% | 67.9% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$3.3M | $705M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.3% | 11.0% |
Go deeper
- MKL stock overview
- MKL income statement
- MKL valuation and score
- WRB stock overview
- WRB income statement
- WRB valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.