American Coastal Insurance vs Kingstone Companies
ACIC and KINS 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 ACIC and KINS compare
American Coastal Insurance is the larger company, worth 1.5 times as much as Kingstone Companies ($493M against $326M).
On earnings, American Coastal Insurance is cheaper: it trades at 5.8× trailing earnings, against 7.7× for Kingstone Companies.
Kingstone Companies grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (24.5% versus −5.3% for American Coastal Insurance).
American Coastal Insurance keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 28.0% compared with 16.8% at Kingstone Companies.
Both pay dividends: American Coastal Insurance yields 7.4% and Kingstone Companies 0.98%.
American Coastal Insurance scores higher on the StockData Score (17 against 16 for Kingstone Companies), 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 | ACIC | KINS |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $493M | $326M |
| Share price | $10.18 | $22.54 |
| Change, 1 year | −15.0% | 48.4% |
| Change, 5 years | 121% | 355% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.61 | 0.61 |
| Employees | 68 | 113 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 17 (better) | 16 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 2 |
| Growth score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Dividend score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 5.8× (better) | 7.7× |
| P/S | 1.6× | 1.3× (better) |
| P/B | 1.4× (better) | 2.4× |
| EV/EBITDA | 2.9× (better) | 5.5× |
| P/FCF | 7.2× | 4.1× (better) |
| FCF yield | 14.0% | 24.1% (better) |
| Fair value | $14.09 | $21.39 |
| Margin of safety | 27.7% (better) | −5.4% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −5.3% | 24.5% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | −16.9% | 10.3% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 2.2% | 33.6% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 2.9% | 32.1% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 100% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 37.7% | – |
| Net margin | 28.0% (better) | 16.8% |
| FCF margin | 22.2% | 31.6% (better) |
| Return on equity | 25.5% | 34.4% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 53.4% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.42 | 0.03 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −1.22 | −0.31 |
| Interest coverage | 12.1× | – |
| Altman Z-score | 0.95 | 1.24 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 3 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 7.4% (better) | 0.98% |
| Payout ratio | 42.0% | 7.2% |
| Years of dividend growth | 1 | 1 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | −11.3% |
| Buyback yield | −0.02% | 0.00% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 7.4% (better) | 0.98% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 32.5% | 53.6% |
| Held by insiders | 48.1% | 13.3% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$429K | $410K (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 6.7% | 2.0% |
Go deeper
- ACIC stock overview
- ACIC income statement
- ACIC valuation and score
- KINS stock overview
- KINS income statement
- KINS valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.