Hanover Insurance vs White Mountains Insurance
THG and WTM 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 THG and WTM compare
Hanover Insurance is the larger company, worth 1.6 times as much as White Mountains Insurance ($8.4B against $5.4B).
On earnings, White Mountains Insurance is cheaper: it trades at 5.2× trailing earnings, against 11.6× for Hanover Insurance.
White Mountains Insurance grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (55.4% versus 5.6% for Hanover Insurance).
White Mountains Insurance keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 29.3% compared with 11.2% at Hanover Insurance.
Both pay dividends: Hanover Insurance yields 1.6% and White Mountains Insurance 0.04%.
White Mountains Insurance scores higher on the StockData Score (15 against 13 for Hanover 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 | THG | WTM |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $8.4B | $5.4B |
| Share price | $242.09 | $2269.99 |
| Change, 1 year | 43.8% | 19.6% |
| Change, 5 years | 92.6% | 110% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.40 | 0.24 |
| Employees | 4,900 | 1,648 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 13 | 15 (better) |
| Valuation score | 1 | 5 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 4 | 4 |
| Health score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend score | 3 | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 11.6× | 5.2× (better) |
| P/S | 1.2× (better) | 1.4× |
| P/B | 2.3× | 1.0× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 7.9× | 4.3× (better) |
| P/FCF | 6.7× | – |
| PEG | 0.15 (better) | 0.33 |
| FCF yield | 14.9% | – |
| Fair value | $220.44 | $3495.83 |
| Margin of safety | −9.8% | 35.1% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 5.6% | 55.4% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 6.4% | 33.1% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 36.1% | 446% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 37.5% | 451% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 14.0% (better) | 13.6% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | – | 94.1% |
| Operating margin | 15.4% | – |
| Net margin | 11.2% | 29.3% (better) |
| FCF margin | 18.5% | – |
| Return on equity | 21.9% | 22.4% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 23.6% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.01 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.21 | – |
| Interest coverage | 22.1× | – |
| Altman Z-score | 1.32 (better) | 1.20 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.6% (better) | 0.04% |
| Payout ratio | 17.5% | 0.21% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 0.00% |
| Buyback yield | 2.8% | 7.6% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 4.3% | 7.6% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 92.0% | 92.3% |
| Held by insiders | 1.2% | 2.7% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$16.2M (better) | −$20.8M |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.0% | 6.0% |
Go deeper
- THG stock overview
- THG income statement
- THG valuation and score
- WTM stock overview
- WTM income statement
- WTM valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.