SF
Stifel Financial Corp.
Financial - Capital Markets
Market Cap$12.03B
5Y Perf.+266.6%
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Try these comparisons:
Stock Comparison
SF vs LAZ
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
LAZ
Lazard Ltd
Financial - Capital Markets
Market Cap$4.24B
5Y Perf.+67.9%
SF vs LAZ — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | SF | LAZ |
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Financial - Capital Markets | Financial - Capital Markets |
| Market Cap | $12.03B | $4.24B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $6.30B | $3.19B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $684M | $237M |
| Gross Margin | 86.6% | 31.8% |
| Operating Margin | 13.8% | 13.0% |
| Forward P/E | 12.4x | 14.1x |
| Total Debt | $2.18B | $2.58B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $2.28B | $1.50B |
SF vs LAZ — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
SF
LAZ
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stifel Financial Co… (SF) | 100 | 366.6 | +266.6% |
| Lazard Ltd (LAZ) | 100 | 167.9 | +67.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SF vs LAZ
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Bottom line: SF leads in 5 of 7 categories, making it the strongest pick for growth and revenue expansion and valuation and capital efficiency. Lazard Ltd is the stronger pick specifically for profitability and margin quality and operational efficiency and capital deployment. As sector peers, any of these can serve as alternatives in the same allocation.
SF
Stifel Financial Corp.
The Banking Pick
SF carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 10 yrs, beta 1.23, yield 2.4%
- Rev growth 6.9%, EPS growth -5.9%
- 5.2% 10Y total return vs LAZ's 94.5%
Best for: income & stability and growth exposure
LAZ
Lazard Ltd
The Banking Pick
LAZ is the clearest fit if your priority is defensive.
- Beta 1.79, yield 3.9%, current ratio 29.35x
- Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs SF's 0.7% (lower = leaner)
- Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs SF's 0.7%
Best for: defensive
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | SF | 6.9% NII/revenue growth vs LAZ's 3.2% |
| Value | SF | Lower P/E (12.4x vs 14.1x) |
| Quality / Margins | LAZ | Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs SF's 0.7% (lower = leaner) |
| Stability / Safety | SF | Beta 1.23 vs LAZ's 1.79, lower leverage |
| Dividends | SF | 2.4% yield, 10-year raise streak, vs LAZ's 3.9% |
| Momentum (1Y) | SF | +33.6% vs LAZ's +16.3% |
| Efficiency (ROA) | LAZ | Efficiency ratio 0.2% vs SF's 0.7% |
SF vs LAZ — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
FY 2025
FY 2025
SF vs LAZ — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
BEST OVERALLSFLAGGINGLAZ
LAZLazard Ltd
1leads
SFStifel Financial Corp.
2leads
6 Total Categories
CATEGORYLEADERvs LAZMETRICS WON
Income & Cash FlowRevenue, margins, and cash flow strength
SF5/5
Valuation MetricsMultiples, price ratios, and targets
Tied
—
Profitability & EfficiencyROE, ROIC, leverage, and quality scores
LAZ5/9
Total Returns1Y, 3Y, 5Y total returns with dividends
SF5/6
Risk & VolatilityBeta, volatility, and downside exposure
Tied
—
Analyst OutlookRatings, price targets, and dividends
Tied
—
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SF leads this category, winning 5 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SF is the larger business by revenue, generating $6.3B annually — 2.0x LAZ's $3.2B. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from 10.9% (SF) to 7.4% (LAZ).
| Metric | SFStifel Financial … | LAZLazard Ltd |
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $6.3B | $3.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $1.0B | $384M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $684M | $237M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $993M | $519M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +86.6% | +31.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +13.8% | +13.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +10.9% | +7.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +19.1% | +15.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +10.5% | -43.8% |
SF leads this category, winning 5 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — SF and LAZ each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 13.2x trailing earnings, SF trades at a 36% valuation discount to LAZ's 20.8x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, LAZ's 11.8x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than SF's 12.8x.
| Metric | SFStifel Financial … | LAZLazard Ltd |
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $12.0B | $4.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $11.9B | $5.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 13.22x | 20.78x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 12.39x | 14.10x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 1.85x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 12.78x | 11.81x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.91x | 1.33x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.44x | 4.85x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 10.02x | 8.38x |
Evenly matched — SF and LAZ each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LAZ leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LAZ delivers a 26.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $27 in annual profit, vs $12 for SF. SF carries lower financial leverage with a 0.36x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to LAZ's 2.61x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), SF scores 8/9 vs LAZ's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | SFStifel Financial … | LAZLazard Ltd |
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +12.0% | +26.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.7% | +5.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.9% | +9.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +3.6% | +9.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.36x | 2.61x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$103M | $1.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $2.3B | $1.5B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $2.2B | $2.6B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.07x | 4.74x |
LAZ leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
SF leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in SF five years ago would be worth $17,718 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $11,940 for LAZ. Over the past 12 months, SF leads with a +33.6% total return vs LAZ's +16.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors SF at 28.6% vs LAZ's 21.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | SFStifel Financial … | LAZLazard Ltd |
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -8.7% | -8.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +33.6% | +16.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +112.8% | +76.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +77.2% | +19.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +516.7% | +94.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +28.6% | +21.0% |
SF leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — SF and LAZ each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
SF is the less volatile stock with a 1.23 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LAZ's 1.79 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. LAZ currently trades 76.8% from its 52-week high vs SF's 59.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | SFStifel Financial … | LAZLazard Ltd |
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.23x | 1.79x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $130.67 | $58.75 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $58.24 | $38.67 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +59.5% | +76.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 46.6 | 41.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.4M | 1.5M |
Evenly matched — SF and LAZ each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — SF and LAZ each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates SF as "Buy" and LAZ as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 20.2% upside for SF (target: $93) vs 4.9% for LAZ (target: $47). For income investors, LAZ offers the higher dividend yield at 3.89% vs SF's 2.40%.
| Metric | SFStifel Financial … | LAZLazard Ltd |
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $93.44 | $47.33 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 22 | 29 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.4% | +3.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 10 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.87 | $1.75 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +2.0% | +2.1% |
Evenly matched — SF and LAZ each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Key Takeaway
SF leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). LAZ leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
Best OverallStifel Financial Corp. (SF)Leads 2 of 6 categories
Loading custom metrics...
SF vs LAZ: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SF or LAZ a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Stifel Financial Corp.
(SF) is the stronger pick with 6. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 2% for Lazard Ltd (LAZ). Stifel Financial Corp. (SF) offers the better valuation at 13. 2x trailing P/E (12. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Stifel Financial Corp. (SF) a "Buy" — based on 22 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which has the better valuation — SF or LAZ?
On trailing P/E, Stifel Financial Corp.
(SF) is the cheapest at 13. 2x versus Lazard Ltd at 20. 8x. On forward P/E, Stifel Financial Corp. is actually cheaper at 12. 4x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — SF or LAZ?
Over the past 5 years, Stifel Financial Corp.
(SF) delivered a total return of +77. 2%, compared to +19. 4% for Lazard Ltd (LAZ). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: SF returned +516. 7% versus LAZ's +94. 5%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — SF or LAZ?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Stifel Financial Corp.
(SF) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 23β versus Lazard Ltd's 1. 79β — meaning LAZ is approximately 45% more volatile than SF relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Stifel Financial Corp. (SF) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 36% versus 3% for Lazard Ltd — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — SF or LAZ?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Stifel Financial Corp.
(SF) is pulling ahead at 6. 9% versus 3. 2% for Lazard Ltd (LAZ). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Stifel Financial Corp. grew EPS -5. 9% year-over-year, compared to -19. 0% for Lazard Ltd. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.
06Which has better profit margins — SF or LAZ?
Stifel Financial Corp.
(SF) is the more profitable company, earning 10. 9% net margin versus 7. 4% for Lazard Ltd — meaning it keeps 10. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: SF leads at 13. 8% versus 13. 0% for LAZ. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — SF leads at 86. 6%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
07Is SF or LAZ more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Stifel Financial Corp.
(SF) trades at 12. 4x forward P/E versus 14. 1x for Lazard Ltd — 1. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for SF: 20. 2% to $93. 44.
08Which pays a better dividend — SF or LAZ?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Lazard Ltd (LAZ) offers the highest yield at 3. 9%, versus 2. 4% for Stifel Financial Corp. (SF).
09Is SF or LAZ better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Stifel Financial Corp.
(SF) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 23), 2. 4% yield, +516. 7% 10Y return). Lazard Ltd (LAZ) carries a higher beta of 1. 79 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (SF: +516. 7%, LAZ: +94. 5%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
10What are the main differences between SF and LAZ?
Both stocks operate in the Financial Services sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: SF is a mid-cap deep-value stock; LAZ is a small-cap income-oriented stock. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform both.
Revenue Growth>
%
(SF: 6.9% · LAZ: 3.2%)Net Margin>
%
(SF: 10.9% · LAZ: 7.4%)P/E Ratio<
x
(SF: 13.2x · LAZ: 20.8x)You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.