Perella Weinberg Partners vs Resolute Holdings Management
PWP and RHLD side by side, both in finance services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How PWP and RHLD compare
Perella Weinberg Partners and Resolute Holdings Management are about the same size, with market caps of $1.4B and $1.2B.
On earnings, Resolute Holdings Management is cheaper: it trades at 33.8× trailing earnings, against 34.7× for Perella Weinberg Partners.
Resolute Holdings Management grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (239% versus 2.5% for Perella Weinberg Partners).
Perella Weinberg Partners keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 4.3% compared with 2.8% at Resolute Holdings Management.
Perella Weinberg Partners pays a dividend yielding 2.0%; Resolute Holdings Management does not pay one.
Perella Weinberg Partners scores higher on the StockData Score (11 against 7 for Resolute Holdings Management), 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 | PWP | RHLD |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $1.4B | $1.2B |
| Share price | $13.87 | $159.47 |
| Change, 1 year | −27.0% | −8.7% |
| Change, 5 years | 8.3% | – |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.28 | 0.03 |
| Employees | 736 | 5,534 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 11 (better) | 7 |
| Valuation score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Growth score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Performance score | 2 | 2 |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 1 |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 34.7× | 33.8× (better) |
| P/S | 1.8× | 0.8× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 17.6× (better) | 26.6× |
| P/FCF | 13.5× | 10.7× (better) |
| FCF yield | 7.4% | 9.3% (better) |
| Fair value | $9.38 | $205.84 |
| Margin of safety | −47.8% | 22.5% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 2.5% | 239% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 7.7% | – |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −28.0% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | – | 39.4% |
| Operating margin | 5.9% | 12.2% (better) |
| Net margin | 4.3% (better) | 2.8% |
| FCF margin | 13.1% (better) | 7.7% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 16.2% |
| Financial health | ||
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 8.22 |
| Interest coverage | – | 1.8× |
| Current ratio | – | 1.41 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.67 (better) | 0.64 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.0% | – |
| Payout ratio | 81.1% | – |
| Buyback yield | 0.15% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 2.2% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 80.7% | 54.0% |
| Held by insiders | 23.4% | – |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$8.2M | $112K (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 11.2% | – |
Go deeper
- PWP stock overview
- PWP income statement
- PWP valuation and score
- RHLD stock overview
- RHLD income statement
- RHLD valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.