BGC vs Intercontinental Exchange
BGC and ICE side by side, both in security & commodity brokers, dealers, exchanges & services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How BGC and ICE compare
Intercontinental Exchange is the larger company, worth 19 times as much as BGC ($101B against $5.3B).
On earnings, BGC is cheaper: it trades at 22.6× trailing earnings, against 24.6× for Intercontinental Exchange.
BGC grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (22.9% versus 12.1% for Intercontinental Exchange).
Intercontinental Exchange keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 29.6% compared with 7.1% at BGC.
Both pay dividends: BGC yields 0.72% and Intercontinental Exchange 1.1%.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | BGC | ICE |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $5.3B | $101B |
| Share price | $11.07 | $180.59 |
| Change, 1 year | 19.7% | 20.8% |
| Change, 5 years | 138% | 35.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.01 | 0.79 |
| Employees | 4,560 | 13K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 17 | 17 |
| Valuation score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 4 | 4 |
| Health score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 22.6× (better) | 24.6× |
| P/S | 1.6× (better) | 7.2× |
| P/B | 4.8× | 3.4× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 14.4× (better) | 17.4× |
| P/FCF | 9.5× (better) | 19.1× |
| PEG | 0.67 (better) | 0.80 |
| FCF yield | 10.5% (better) | 5.2% |
| Fair value | $13.09 | $176.96 |
| Margin of safety | 15.4% (better) | −2.0% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 22.9% (better) | 12.1% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 7.4% | 8.9% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 49.5% (better) | 31.6% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 48.5% (better) | 33.5% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 20.9% (better) | 8.9% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | – | 40.6% |
| Net margin | 7.1% | 29.6% (better) |
| FCF margin | 16.3% | 37.6% (better) |
| Return on equity | 23.6% (better) | 14.2% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 8.5% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.63 | 0.88 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.15 (better) | 3.49 |
| Interest coverage | – | 6.8× |
| Current ratio | – | 1.03 |
| Altman Z-score | 1.12 (better) | 0.80 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.72% | 1.1% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 15.9% | 27.8% |
| Years of dividend growth | 2 | 13 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | −14.0% | 9.9% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 5.8% (better) | 2.0% |
| Shareholder yield | 6.5% (better) | 3.1% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 65.4% | 93.5% |
| Held by insiders | 48.6% | 0.63% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$95.5K (better) | −$70.3M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 5 |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.8% | 1.1% |
Go deeper
- BGC stock overview
- BGC income statement
- BGC valuation and score
- ICE stock overview
- ICE income statement
- ICE valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.