BlackRock vs Stifel Financial
BLK and SF side by side, both in security brokers, dealers, and flotation. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How BLK and SF compare
BlackRock is the larger company, worth 15 times as much as Stifel Financial ($397B against $27.4B).
On earnings, Stifel Financial is cheaper: it trades at 12.6× trailing earnings, against 27.8× for BlackRock.
BlackRock grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (24.7% versus 8.2% for Stifel Financial).
BlackRock keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 24.2% compared with 14.6% at Stifel Financial.
Both pay dividends: BlackRock yields 1.8% and Stifel Financial 1.8%.
BlackRock scores higher on the StockData Score (12 against 9 for Stifel Financial), 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 | BLK | SF |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $397B | $27.4B |
| Share price | $1222.91 | $72.75 |
| Change, 1 year | 11.8% | −12.7% |
| Change, 5 years | 33.7% | 47.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.33 | 1.19 |
| Employees | 25K | 9,000 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 12 (better) | 9 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 3 | 3 |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend score | 2 | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 27.8× | 12.6× (better) |
| P/S | 13.9× | 4.1× (better) |
| P/B | 6.8× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 35.7× | 12.4× (better) |
| P/FCF | 83.1× | 34.5× (better) |
| PEG | 21.42 | 3.79 (better) |
| FCF yield | 1.2% | 2.9% (better) |
| Fair value | $670.63 | $71.45 |
| Margin of safety | −82.4% | −1.8% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 24.7% (better) | 8.2% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 8.4% | 10.7% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 13.4% | 47.2% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 13.1% | 53.2% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 2.1% | 7.1% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 32.5% | – |
| Net margin | 24.2% (better) | 14.6% |
| FCF margin | 16.8% (better) | 11.8% |
| Return on equity | 12.2% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 15.6% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | – |
| Interest coverage | 17.1× | – |
| Altman Z-score | 2.50 (better) | 0.57 |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.8% (better) | 1.8% |
| Years of dividend growth | 3 | 8 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 32.5% |
| Buyback yield | – | 1.6% |
| Shareholder yield | 1.8% | 3.4% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 37.0% | 36.8% |
| Held by insiders | 0.93% | 1.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$201M | −$423K (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 4 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 0.66% | – |
Go deeper
- BLK stock overview
- BLK income statement
- BLK valuation and score
- SF stock overview
- SF income statement
- SF valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.