Compass vs Marcus & Millichap
COMP and MMI side by side, both in real estate. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How COMP and MMI compare
Compass is the larger company, worth 8.3 times as much as Marcus & Millichap ($7.6B against $918M).
On earnings, Marcus & Millichap is cheaper: it trades at 62.2× trailing earnings, against 71.7× for Compass.
Compass grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (89.8% versus 10.0% for Marcus & Millichap).
Marcus & Millichap keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 1.8% compared with 1.1% at Compass.
Marcus & Millichap pays a dividend yielding 2.1%; Compass does not pay one.
Marcus & Millichap scores higher on the StockData Score (12 against 6 for Compass), 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 | COMP | MMI |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $7.6B | $918M |
| Share price | $10.04 | $24.25 |
| Change, 1 year | 6.5% | −21.8% |
| Change, 5 years | −3.7% | −48.2% |
| Beta (5Y) | 2.22 | 0.98 |
| Employees | 3,200 | 854 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 6 | 12 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Health score | 1 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 71.7× | 62.2× (better) |
| P/S | 0.6× (better) | 1.1× |
| P/B | 2.4× | 1.6× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 32.5× | 31.5× (better) |
| P/FCF | 25.8× | 13.9× (better) |
| FCF yield | 3.9% | 7.2% (better) |
| Fair value | $2.60 | $11.43 |
| Margin of safety | −286% | −112% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 89.8% (better) | 10.0% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 13.3% (better) | 1.0% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | −1.4% | 1.3% (better) |
| Net margin | 1.1% | 1.8% (better) |
| FCF margin | 2.3% | 8.0% (better) |
| Return on equity | 6.8% (better) | 2.6% |
| Return on invested capital | −4.8% | 1.9% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.00 (better) | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 7.53 | – |
| Interest coverage | −1.5× | 17.2× (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.12 | 2.79 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.84 | 4.67 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 2.1% |
| Payout ratio | – | 135% |
| Buyback yield | – | 4.7% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 6.7% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 93.5% | 60.4% |
| Held by insiders | 6.8% | 38.9% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$2.5M | −$48.5K (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 6.9% | 3.7% |
Go deeper
- COMP stock overview
- COMP income statement
- COMP valuation and score
- MMI stock overview
- MMI income statement
- MMI valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.