Compass vs Newmark
COMP and NMRK 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 NMRK compare
Compass is the larger company, worth 4.0 times as much as Newmark ($7.7B against $1.9B).
On earnings, Newmark is cheaper: it trades at 14.5× trailing earnings, against 72.9× for Compass.
Compass grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (89.8% versus 17.5% for Newmark).
Newmark keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 4.1% compared with 1.1% at Compass.
Newmark pays a dividend yielding 2.3%; Compass does not pay one.
Newmark scores higher on the StockData Score (17 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 | NMRK |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $7.7B | $1.9B |
| Share price | $10.21 | $10.62 |
| Change, 1 year | 7.5% | −38.6% |
| Change, 5 years | −2.1% | −36.9% |
| Beta (5Y) | 2.23 | 1.28 |
| Employees | 3,200 | 8,800 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 6 | 17 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 6 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 72.9× | 14.5× (better) |
| P/S | 0.6× | 0.5× (better) |
| P/B | 2.5× | 1.3× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 32.9× | 6.2× (better) |
| P/FCF | 26.3× | 5.0× (better) |
| PEG | – | 0.99 |
| FCF yield | 3.8% | 20.1% (better) |
| Fair value | $2.61 | $18.01 |
| Margin of safety | −291% | 41.0% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 89.8% (better) | 17.5% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 13.3% (better) | 11.6% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 18.1% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 25.9% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 11.8% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | −1.4% | 7.4% (better) |
| Net margin | 1.1% | 4.1% (better) |
| FCF margin | 2.3% | 10.4% (better) |
| Return on equity | 6.8% | 10.7% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | −4.8% | 10.2% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.00 | 0.60 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 7.53 | 1.38 (better) |
| Interest coverage | −1.5× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.12 (better) | 1.09 |
| Altman Z-score | 1.85 (better) | 1.47 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 2.3% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 0 |
| Buyback yield | – | 11.0% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 13.3% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 93.5% | 64.6% |
| Held by insiders | 6.8% | 48.8% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$2.5M | – |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 6.9% | 6.4% |
Go deeper
- COMP stock overview
- COMP income statement
- COMP valuation and score
- NMRK stock overview
- NMRK income statement
- NMRK valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.