ADT vs Broadridge Financial Solutions
ADT and BR side by side, both in miscellaneous business services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How ADT and BR compare
Broadridge Financial Solutions is the larger company, worth 3.0 times as much as ADT ($21.9B against $7.2B).
Broadridge Financial Solutions grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (8.5% versus 2.1% for ADT).
Broadridge Financial Solutions keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 15.0% compared with 11.9% at ADT.
Both pay dividends: ADT yields 2.2% and Broadridge Financial Solutions 2.1%.
Broadridge Financial Solutions scores higher on the StockData Score (22 against 12 for ADT), 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 | ADT | BR |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $7.2B | $21.9B |
| Share price | $9.90 | $192.45 |
| Change, 1 year | 19.1% | −14.0% |
| Change, 5 years | 10.1% | 10.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.92 | 0.81 |
| Employees | 12K | 16K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 12 | 22 (better) |
| Valuation score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Growth score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 3 | 6 (better) |
| Health score | 2 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 20.0× |
| P/S | 1.4× (better) | 2.9× |
| P/B | 2.1× (better) | 7.7× |
| EV/EBITDA | 5.6× (better) | 17.2× |
| P/FCF | 3.7× (better) | 17.2× |
| PEG | – | 0.92 |
| FCF yield | 27.2% (better) | 5.8% |
| Fair value | $34.70 | $233.30 |
| Margin of safety | 71.5% (better) | 17.5% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 2.1% | 8.5% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | −0.71% | 8.4% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −1.6% | 33.9% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 35.2% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 15.6% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | – | 31.8% |
| Operating margin | 25.0% (better) | 17.4% |
| Net margin | 11.9% | 15.0% (better) |
| FCF margin | 38.1% (better) | 17.1% |
| Return on equity | 17.2% | 40.9% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 8.2% | 18.6% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 2.21 | 1.15 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.88 | 1.98 (better) |
| Interest coverage | – | 11.6× |
| Current ratio | 0.69 | 1.24 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 0.69 | 4.23 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 | 8 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.2% (better) | 2.1% |
| Payout ratio | 29.5% | 39.4% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 17 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 11.1% |
| Buyback yield | 9.8% (better) | 2.8% |
| Shareholder yield | 12.1% (better) | 4.8% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 98.5% | 94.5% |
| Held by insiders | 20.0% | 0.44% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $526K (better) | −$2.7M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.6% | 3.1% |
Go deeper
- ADT stock overview
- ADT income statement
- ADT valuation and score
- BR stock overview
- BR income statement
- BR valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.