Arch Capital vs Berkley W R
ACGL and WRB 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 ACGL and WRB compare
Arch Capital is the larger company, worth 1.3 times as much as Berkley W R ($37.4B against $28.7B).
On earnings, Arch Capital is cheaper: it trades at 9.0× trailing earnings, against 16.4× for Berkley W R.
Berkley W R grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (1.5% versus −3.9% for Arch Capital).
Arch Capital keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 23.3% compared with 12.5% at Berkley W R.
Berkley W R pays a dividend yielding 2.4%; Arch Capital does not pay one.
Arch Capital scores higher on the StockData Score (10 against 9 for Berkley W R), 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 | ACGL | WRB |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $37.4B | $28.7B |
| Share price | $109.61 | $77.44 |
| Change, 1 year | 19.4% | 1.0% |
| Change, 5 years | 161% | 117% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.40 | 0.29 |
| Employees | 8,000 | 8,804 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 10 (better) | 9 |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Health score | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 9.0× (better) | 16.4× |
| P/S | 2.0× | 1.9× (better) |
| P/B | 1.6× (better) | 3.0× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 11.1× |
| P/FCF | 6.6× | – |
| PEG | 0.20 (better) | 1.55 |
| FCF yield | 15.0% | – |
| Fair value | $114.13 | $58.49 |
| Margin of safety | 4.0% (better) | −32.4% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −3.9% | 1.5% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 18.6% (better) | 12.7% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 6.9% (better) | −2.3% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 14.5% (better) | −0.63% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 28.4% | 29.0% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Net margin | 23.3% (better) | 12.5% |
| FCF margin | 30.0% | – |
| Return on equity | 18.7% | 19.2% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Altman Z-score | 1.09 | 1.25 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.00% | 2.4% (better) |
| Payout ratio | – | 37.9% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 55.0% |
| Buyback yield | 11.2% (better) | 2.2% |
| Shareholder yield | 11.2% (better) | 4.6% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 91.6% | 75.1% |
| Held by insiders | 5.5% | 67.9% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$28.0M | $705M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 3 |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 10.2% |
Go deeper
- ACGL stock overview
- ACGL income statement
- ACGL valuation and score
- WRB stock overview
- WRB income statement
- WRB valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.