Safety Insurance vs United Fire
SAFT and UFCS 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 SAFT and UFCS compare
Safety Insurance and United Fire are about the same size, with market caps of $1.5B and $1.5B.
On earnings, United Fire is cheaper: it trades at 10.6× trailing earnings, against 22.4× for Safety Insurance.
United Fire grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (11.4% versus 7.2% for Safety Insurance).
United Fire keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 9.6% compared with 5.3% at Safety Insurance.
Both pay dividends: Safety Insurance yields 3.5% and United Fire 1.3%.
United Fire scores higher on the StockData Score (10 against 9 for Safety Insurance), 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 | SAFT | UFCS |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $1.5B | $1.5B |
| Share price | $103.90 | $56.83 |
| Change, 1 year | 54.2% | 89.2% |
| Change, 5 years | 28.4% | 155% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.33 | 0.46 |
| Employees | 568 | 1,173 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 9 | 10 (better) |
| Valuation score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Growth score | 3 | 3 |
| Performance score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Health score | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 22.4× | 10.6× (better) |
| P/S | 1.2× | 1.0× (better) |
| P/B | 1.7× | 1.5× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 15.4× | 6.6× (better) |
| P/FCF | 8.7× | – |
| PEG | 0.78 | 0.11 (better) |
| FCF yield | 11.5% | – |
| Fair value | $76.90 | $52.46 |
| Margin of safety | −35.1% | −8.3% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 7.2% | 11.4% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 8.4% (better) | 5.3% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −19.1% | 53.5% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −18.7% | 53.3% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −6.1% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Net margin | 5.3% | 9.6% (better) |
| FCF margin | 13.7% | – |
| Return on equity | 7.8% | 15.5% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Altman Z-score | 1.54 (better) | 0.93 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 3.5% (better) | 1.3% |
| Payout ratio | 78.7% | 13.1% |
| Years of dividend growth | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 0.22% (better) | −10.9% |
| Buyback yield | – | 0.14% |
| Shareholder yield | 3.5% (better) | 1.5% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 84.4% | 68.4% |
| Held by insiders | 12.5% | 16.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$139M | −$994K (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.4% | 2.2% |
Go deeper
- SAFT stock overview
- SAFT income statement
- SAFT valuation and score
- UFCS stock overview
- UFCS income statement
- UFCS valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.