Head to head
Opendoor Technologies vs CBRE Group
Side-by-side on the measures that matter, with a plain-English read. Full detail: OPEN · CBRE
OPEN
Opendoor Technologies
2.27+0.00%
1-year price shape — -76% over the period
Quant Rating E · 0/100
vs
CBRE
CBRE Group
127.56-2.37%
1-year price shape — -16% over the period
Quant Rating D · 21/100
1-year performance, rebased to 100
CBRE Group edges it on the scoreable measures. CBRE Group has the highest Quant Rating (21); CBRE Group has done best over the past year (-16%); CBRE Group earns the most per share.
| OPEN | CBRE | |
|---|---|---|
| Snapshot | ||
| Sector | Real Estate Services | -- |
| Last price | 2.27 | 127.56 |
| Change today | +0.00% | -2.37% |
| 1-year return | -75.6% | -16.5% |
| Market cap | $2.20B | $36.94B |
| 52-week range | 2.13 – 9.46 | 121.69 – 174.27 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E (TTM) | -1.20 | 29.19 |
| P/E percentile, own 5-yr range | 85th | 45th |
| P/B | 2.41 | 4.40 |
| Dividend yield | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Profitability & growth | ||
| EPS (TTM) | -1.70 | 3.85 |
| Net profit (TTM) | $-1.65B | $1.11B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $3.25B | $43.64B |
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -43.7% | +15.5% |
| Gross margin | 8.6% | 18.6% |
| Operating margin | -15.9% | 2.8% |
| Net margin | -46.7% | 3.0% |
| Free cash flow (TTM) | $-474.00M | $938.00M |
| Ownership & sentiment | ||
| Institutional ownership | 59.7% | 98.8% |
| Insider activity (12mo) | 23 buy / 22 sell | 16 buy / 32 sell |
| Short interest (% of float) | 22.0% | 1.5% |
| Analyst consensus | 20% buy / 60% hold / 20% sell (5) | 89% buy / 11% hold (9) |
| Analyst price target | $4 (+81%) | $185 (+45%) |
| StockVane view | ||
| StockVane Quant Rating | E (0) | D (21) |
| Company | ||
| Employees | 1,042 | 155,000 |
| Founded | 2013 | 1906 |
▲ marks the more favourable stock(s) on measures with a clear direction (lower P/E, higher yield, higher Quant Rating, better 1-year return). Analyst consensus counts each covering institution once, at its most recent rating. Not a recommendation. Quant Rating method: Data & Methodology.