Palomar vs Safety Insurance
PLMR and SAFT side by side, both in fire, marine, and casualty insurance. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How PLMR and SAFT compare
Palomar is the larger company, worth 2.7 times as much as Safety Insurance ($4.2B against $1.5B).
On earnings, Palomar is cheaper: it trades at 19.8× trailing earnings, against 21.8× for Safety Insurance.
Palomar grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (58.4% versus 4.6% for Safety Insurance).
Palomar keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 17.6% compared with 5.5% at Safety Insurance.
Both pay dividends: Palomar yields 0.28% and Safety Insurance 3.5%.
Palomar scores higher on the StockData Score (11 against 8 for Safety Insurance), 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 | PLMR | SAFT |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $4.2B | $1.5B |
| Share price | $158.31 | $104.34 |
| Change, 1 year | 19.9% | 35.8% |
| Change, 5 years | 89.3% | 34.3% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.67 | 0.32 |
| Employees | 439 | 568 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 11 (better) | 8 |
| Valuation score | 1 | 1 |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 1 |
| Health score | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 19.8× (better) | 21.8× |
| P/S | 3.4× | 1.2× (better) |
| P/B | 4.2× | 1.8× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 15.2× |
| P/FCF | 9.2× (better) | 10.4× |
| PEG | 0.38 (better) | 0.76 |
| FCF yield | 10.8% (better) | 9.6% |
| Fair value | $123.31 | $77.42 |
| Margin of safety | −28.4% (better) | −34.8% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 58.4% (better) | 4.6% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 39.1% (better) | 8.4% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 23.4% (better) | −19.4% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 24.7% (better) | −18.8% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 97.3% (better) | −6.1% |
| Profitability | ||
| Net margin | 17.6% (better) | 5.5% |
| FCF margin | 36.6% (better) | 11.4% |
| Return on equity | 23.3% (better) | 8.0% |
| Financial health | ||
| Altman Z-score | 1.25 | 1.54 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.28% | 3.5% (better) |
| Payout ratio | – | 76.5% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 1 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 0.22% |
| Buyback yield | 1.8% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 2.0% | 3.5% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 92.6% | 84.4% |
| Held by insiders | 2.6% | 12.5% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$21.6M (better) | −$139M |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.4% | 3.0% |
Go deeper
- PLMR stock overview
- PLMR income statement
- PLMR valuation and score
- SAFT stock overview
- SAFT income statement
- SAFT valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.