CRA International vs Perella Weinberg Partners
CRAI and PWP side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CRAI and PWP compare
CRA International and Perella Weinberg Partners are about the same size, with market caps of $1.3B and $1.3B.
On earnings, CRA International is cheaper: it trades at 25.7× trailing earnings, against 33.1× for Perella Weinberg Partners.
CRA International grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (12.7% versus 2.5% for Perella Weinberg Partners).
CRA International keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 6.3% compared with 4.3% at Perella Weinberg Partners.
Both pay dividends: CRA International yields 1.1% and Perella Weinberg Partners 2.1%.
CRA International scores higher on the StockData Score (15 against 11 for Perella Weinberg Partners), 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 | CRAI | PWP |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $1.3B | $1.3B |
| Share price | $205.32 | $13.26 |
| Change, 1 year | 14.3% | −31.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 96.7% | 3.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.60 | 1.27 |
| Employees | 597 | 736 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 15 (better) | 11 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 2 |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Dividend score | 3 | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 25.7× (better) | 33.1× |
| P/S | 1.6× (better) | 1.7× |
| P/B | 6.7× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 13.4× (better) | 16.7× |
| P/FCF | 135× | 12.9× (better) |
| PEG | 2.28 | – |
| FCF yield | 0.74% | 7.7% (better) |
| Fair value | $165.43 | $9.45 |
| Margin of safety | −24.1% (better) | −40.3% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 12.7% (better) | 2.5% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 8.1% (better) | 7.7% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −8.6% (better) | −28.0% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −4.1% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 21.5% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 29.0% | – |
| Operating margin | 10.5% (better) | 5.9% |
| Net margin | 6.3% (better) | 4.3% |
| FCF margin | 1.2% | 13.1% (better) |
| Return on equity | 26.2% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 27.1% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.38 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.53 | – |
| Interest coverage | 10.8× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.05 | – |
| Altman Z-score | 3.66 (better) | 2.59 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.1% | 2.1% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 28.6% | 81.1% |
| Years of dividend growth | 9 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 16.5% | – |
| Buyback yield | 3.8% (better) | 0.15% |
| Shareholder yield | 4.9% (better) | 2.3% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 94.8% | 80.7% |
| Held by insiders | 3.7% | 23.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$6.2M (better) | −$8.2M |
| Short interest, % of float | 5.0% | 11.2% |
Go deeper
- CRAI stock overview
- CRAI income statement
- CRAI valuation and score
- PWP stock overview
- PWP income statement
- PWP valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.