MarketAxess vs Virtu Financial
MKTX and VIRT side by side, both in security brokers, dealers, and flotation. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How MKTX and VIRT compare
Virtu Financial is the larger company, worth 1.4 times as much as MarketAxess ($8.3B against $5.8B).
On earnings, Virtu Financial is cheaper: it trades at 8.9× trailing earnings, against 19.5× for MarketAxess.
Virtu Financial grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (20.8% versus 3.9% for MarketAxess).
MarketAxess keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 35.2% compared with 13.5% at Virtu Financial.
Both pay dividends: MarketAxess yields 1.9% and Virtu Financial 1.8%.
MarketAxess scores higher on the StockData Score (15 against 13 for Virtu 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 | MKTX | VIRT |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $5.8B | $8.3B |
| Share price | $165.30 | $53.76 |
| Change, 1 year | 4.1% | 56.3% |
| Change, 5 years | −57.4% | 92.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.63 | 0.59 |
| Employees | 868 | 1,027 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 15 (better) | 13 |
| Valuation score | 3 | 3 |
| Growth score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend score | 2 | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 19.5× | 8.9× (better) |
| P/S | 6.7× | 2.0× (better) |
| P/B | 4.7× | 4.5× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 13.2× | – |
| P/FCF | 29.9× | 16.0× (better) |
| PEG | – | 0.32 |
| FCF yield | 3.3% | 6.2% (better) |
| Fair value | $197.31 | $67.11 |
| Margin of safety | 16.2% | 19.9% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 3.9% | 20.8% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.2% (better) | 2.3% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 37.5% (better) | 36.0% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 42.8% (better) | 37.1% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −3.3% | −0.12% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 40.5% | – |
| Net margin | 35.2% (better) | 13.5% |
| FCF margin | 22.3% (better) | 12.8% |
| Return on equity | 23.3% | 33.6% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 29.0% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.09 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.30 | – |
| Interest coverage | 59.9× | – |
| Altman Z-score | 4.77 (better) | 0.44 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.9% (better) | 1.8% |
| Years of dividend growth | 12 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 4.8% (better) | 0.00% |
| Buyback yield | 5.9% (better) | 0.00% |
| Shareholder yield | 7.8% (better) | 1.8% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 111% | 52.9% |
| Held by insiders | 2.5% | 98.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$1.2M (better) | −$15.0M |
| Short interest, % of float | 9.3% | 234% |
Go deeper
- MKTX stock overview
- MKTX income statement
- MKTX valuation and score
- VIRT stock overview
- VIRT income statement
- VIRT valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.