Morgan Stanley vs Stifel Financial
MS 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 MS and SF compare
Morgan Stanley is the larger company, worth 11 times as much as Stifel Financial ($299B against $27.5B).
On earnings, Stifel Financial is cheaper: it trades at 12.7× trailing earnings, against 15.1× for Morgan Stanley.
Morgan Stanley grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (16.2% versus 8.2% for Stifel Financial).
Morgan Stanley keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 25.5% compared with 14.6% at Stifel Financial.
Both pay dividends: Morgan Stanley yields 1.7% and Stifel Financial 1.8%.
Morgan Stanley scores higher on the StockData Score (17 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 | MS | SF |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $299B | $27.5B |
| Share price | $190.61 | $73.02 |
| Change, 1 year | 15.5% | −10.1% |
| Change, 5 years | 96.7% | 48.0% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.20 | 1.19 |
| Employees | 83K | 9,000 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 17 (better) | 9 |
| Valuation score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 15.1× | 12.7× (better) |
| P/S | 3.7× (better) | 4.1× |
| P/B | 2.6× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 12.4× |
| P/FCF | – | 34.6× |
| PEG | 0.82 (better) | 3.80 |
| FCF yield | – | 2.9% |
| Fair value | $193.06 | $71.51 |
| Margin of safety | 1.3% (better) | −2.1% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 16.2% (better) | 8.2% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 7.7% | 10.7% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 26.4% | 47.2% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 29.2% | 53.2% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 9.6% (better) | 7.1% |
| Profitability | ||
| Net margin | 25.5% (better) | 14.6% |
| FCF margin | – | 11.8% |
| Return on equity | 18.0% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | – |
| Altman Z-score | 0.27 | 0.57 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.7% | 1.8% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 34.1% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 12 (better) | 8 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 22.4% | 32.5% (better) |
| Buyback yield | – | 1.6% |
| Shareholder yield | 1.7% | 3.4% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 85.9% | 36.8% |
| Held by insiders | 24.4% | 1.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$52.2M | −$423K (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.3% | – |
Go deeper
- MS stock overview
- MS income statement
- MS 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.