Miami International vs Oppenheimer
MIAX and OPY 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 MIAX and OPY compare
Miami International is the larger company, worth 3.8 times as much as Oppenheimer ($3.7B against $956M).
On earnings, Oppenheimer is cheaper: it trades at 12.1× trailing earnings, against 13.2× for Miami International.
Miami International grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (14.0% versus 13.9% for Oppenheimer).
Miami International keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 19.8% compared with 4.9% at Oppenheimer.
Oppenheimer pays a dividend yielding 0.85%; Miami International does not pay one.
Oppenheimer scores higher on the StockData Score (14 against 12 for Miami International), 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 | MIAX | OPY |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $3.7B | $956M |
| Share price | $37.08 | $89.25 |
| Change, 1 year | −27.2% | 28.0% |
| Change, 5 years | – | 71.0% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.94 | 0.82 |
| Employees | 439 | 2,947 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 12 | 14 (better) |
| Valuation score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 13.2× | 12.1× (better) |
| P/S | 2.4× | 0.5× (better) |
| P/B | 3.0× | 1.0× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 15.1× | 7.3× (better) |
| P/FCF | 16.7× | 16.7× (better) |
| PEG | – | 0.17 |
| FCF yield | 6.0% | 6.0% (better) |
| Fair value | $38.85 | $113.67 |
| Margin of safety | 4.6% | 21.5% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 14.0% (better) | 13.9% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | – | 6.4% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 2.2% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | −0.94% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 7.0% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 34.9% | – |
| Operating margin | 10.9% (better) | 7.2% |
| Net margin | 19.8% (better) | 4.9% |
| FCF margin | 14.6% (better) | 3.3% |
| Return on equity | 28.9% (better) | 9.1% |
| Return on invested capital | 34.1% (better) | 9.4% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 (better) | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −3.52 | – |
| Interest coverage | 533× | – |
| Current ratio | 3.10 | – |
| Altman Z-score | 7.06 (better) | 1.04 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 0.85% |
| Payout ratio | – | 21.5% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 2 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | −13.4% |
| Buyback yield | 0.71% (better) | 0.24% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.71% | 1.1% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 72.6% | 41.7% |
| Held by insiders | 23.0% | 6.0% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$85.8M | −$424K (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 9.3% | 1.1% |
Go deeper
- MIAX stock overview
- MIAX income statement
- MIAX valuation and score
- OPY stock overview
- OPY income statement
- OPY valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.