Head to head
Ryan Specialty Holdings vs Marsh
Side-by-side on the measures that matter, with a plain-English read. Full detail: RYAN · MRSH
RYAN
Ryan Specialty Holdings
37.60-1.83%
1-year price shape — -35% over the period
Quant Rating E · 9/100
vs
MRSH
Marsh
173.66+1.12%
1-year price shape — -13% over the period
Quant Rating D · 25/100
1-year performance, rebased to 100
Marsh edges it on the scoreable measures. Marsh has the highest Quant Rating (25); Marsh has done best over the past year (-13%); Marsh trades cheapest on trailing earnings.
| RYAN | MRSH | |
|---|---|---|
| Snapshot | ||
| Sector | Insurance Brokers | Insurance Brokers |
| Last price | 37.60 | 173.66 |
| Change today | -1.83% | +1.12% |
| 1-year return | -34.6% | -13.4% |
| Market cap | $4.59B | $82.87B |
| 52-week range | 29.07 – 58.29 | 154.82 – 202.84 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E (TTM) | 50.81 | 21.20 |
| P/E percentile, own 5-yr range | 21st | 8th |
| P/B | 9.01 | 5.46 |
| Dividend yield | 1.33% | 2.07% |
| Profitability & growth | ||
| EPS (TTM) | 0.47 | 8.43 |
| Net profit (TTM) | $57.38M | $4.02B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $3.22B | $27.95B |
| Revenue growth (YoY) | +7.2% | +6.2% |
| Gross margin | -- | 42.4% |
| Operating margin | -- | 21.6% |
| Net margin | 3.1% | 14.2% |
| Free cash flow (TTM) | $496.69M | $4.77B |
| Ownership & sentiment | ||
| Institutional ownership | 97.6% | 94.7% |
| Insider activity (12mo) | 37 buy / 13 sell | 40 buy / 8 sell |
| Short interest (% of float) | 9.8% | 1.2% |
| Analyst consensus | 67% buy / 25% hold / 8% sell (12) | 33% buy / 61% hold / 6% sell (18) |
| Analyst price target | $49 (+30%) | $204 (+17%) |
| StockVane view | ||
| StockVane Quant Rating | E (9) | D (25) |
| Company | ||
| Employees | 6,110 | 95,000 |
| Founded | 2010 | 1871 |
▲ 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.