Maximus vs TriNet
MMS and TNET side by side, both in miscellaneous business services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How MMS and TNET compare
Maximus and TriNet are about the same size, with market caps of $3.4B and $3.0B.
On earnings, Maximus is cheaper: it trades at 9.7× trailing earnings, against 17.8× for TriNet.
Maximus grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (−3.3% versus −4.2% for TriNet).
Maximus keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 7.1% compared with 3.6% at TriNet.
Both pay dividends: Maximus yields 2.0% and TriNet 1.7%.
Maximus scores higher on the StockData Score (22 against 10 for TriNet), 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 | MMS | TNET |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $3.4B | $3.0B |
| Share price | $65.38 | $65.58 |
| Change, 1 year | −21.3% | 20.3% |
| Change, 5 years | −19.6% | −38.0% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.57 | 0.88 |
| Employees | 37K | 3,400 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 22 (better) | 10 |
| Valuation score | 6 (better) | 2 |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 2 |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 9.7× (better) | 17.8× |
| P/S | 0.7× | 0.6× (better) |
| P/B | 2.0× (better) | 22.6× |
| EV/EBITDA | 7.9× | – |
| P/FCF | 7.9× (better) | 10.5× |
| PEG | 0.52 | – |
| FCF yield | 12.7% (better) | 9.5% |
| Fair value | $133.48 | $77.48 |
| Margin of safety | 51.0% (better) | 15.4% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −3.3% (better) | −4.2% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.4% (better) | 4.4% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 17.3% | 29.3% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 24.7% | 36.8% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 10.2% (better) | −4.3% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 25.6% | – |
| Operating margin | 11.0% | – |
| Net margin | 7.1% (better) | 3.6% |
| FCF margin | 8.3% (better) | 5.9% |
| Return on equity | 21.1% | 142% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 13.2% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.94 (better) | 6.74 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.51 | – |
| Interest coverage | 6.5× | – |
| Current ratio | 2.42 (better) | 1.14 |
| Altman Z-score | 3.04 (better) | 1.65 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.0% (better) | 1.7% |
| Payout ratio | – | 30.8% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 1.4% | – |
| Buyback yield | 10.1% (better) | 5.2% |
| Shareholder yield | 12.1% (better) | 6.9% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 107% | 95.9% |
| Held by insiders | 2.2% | 48.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$254K (better) | −$641K |
| Short interest, % of float | 6.0% | 7.3% |
Go deeper
- MMS stock overview
- MMS income statement
- MMS valuation and score
- TNET stock overview
- TNET income statement
- TNET valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.