Nasdaq vs Tradeweb Markets
NDAQ and TW 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 NDAQ and TW compare
Nasdaq is the larger company, worth 2.1 times as much as Tradeweb Markets ($59.4B against $28.7B).
On earnings, Tradeweb Markets is cheaper: it trades at 28.8× trailing earnings, against 31.0× for Nasdaq.
Tradeweb Markets grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (14.4% versus 7.7% for Nasdaq).
Tradeweb Markets keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 39.8% compared with 22.5% at Nasdaq.
Both pay dividends: Nasdaq yields 1.1% and Tradeweb Markets 0.44%.
Nasdaq scores higher on the StockData Score (18 against 17 for Tradeweb Markets), 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 | NDAQ | TW |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $59.4B | $28.7B |
| Share price | $106.23 | $122.54 |
| Change, 1 year | 24.4% | 16.2% |
| Change, 5 years | 49.7% | 29.7% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.89 | 0.66 |
| Employees | 9,525 | 1,569 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 18 (better) | 17 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Health score | 5 | 5 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 31.0× | 28.8× (better) |
| P/S | 6.8× (better) | 12.6× |
| P/B | 5.0× | 4.3× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 24.6× | 21.8× (better) |
| P/FCF | 30.4× | 24.8× (better) |
| PEG | 2.82 | 0.78 (better) |
| FCF yield | 3.3% | 4.0% (better) |
| Fair value | $79.91 | $131.06 |
| Margin of safety | −32.9% | 6.5% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 7.7% | 14.4% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 8.0% | 18.1% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 30.4% | 44.3% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 31.9% | 45.9% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 10.7% | 33.8% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 64.2% | – |
| Operating margin | 29.5% | 44.1% (better) |
| Net margin | 22.5% | 39.8% (better) |
| FCF margin | 22.3% | 50.6% (better) |
| Return on equity | 16.5% (better) | 14.1% |
| Return on invested capital | 10.3% | 17.7% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.73 (better) | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.00 | – |
| Interest coverage | 7.4× | 490× (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.01 | – |
| Altman Z-score | 3.48 | 16.65 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 9 (better) | 7 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.1% (better) | 0.44% |
| Payout ratio | 32.3% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 13 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 10.1% (better) | 8.4% |
| Buyback yield | 2.2% (better) | 1.9% |
| Shareholder yield | 3.3% (better) | 2.4% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 84.7% | 50.0% |
| Held by insiders | 18.9% | 51.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$65.1M | −$44.6M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.7% | 3.0% |
Go deeper
- NDAQ stock overview
- NDAQ income statement
- NDAQ valuation and score
- TW stock overview
- TW income statement
- TW valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.