Real Estate - Services
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
ASPS vs FAF
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Insurance - Specialty
ASPS vs FAF — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Real Estate - Services | Insurance - Specialty |
| Market Cap | $77M | $7.14B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $175M | $6.01B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $6M | $673M |
| Gross Margin | 27.8% | 74.3% |
| Operating Margin | 3.7% | 14.8% |
| Forward P/E | 45.3x | 10.9x |
| Total Debt | $192M | $1.91B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $27M | $1.39B |
ASPS vs FAF — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Altisource Portfoli… (ASPS) | 100 | 6.0 | -94.0% |
| First American Fina… (FAF) | 100 | 138.2 | +38.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ASPS vs FAF
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ASPS is the clearest fit if your priority is efficiency.
- 4.5% ROA vs FAF's 4.0%, ROIC 11.5% vs 10.7%
FAF carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.59, yield 3.1%
- Rev growth 21.6%, EPS growth 376.2%, 3Y rev CAGR -0.7%
- 138.4% 10Y total return vs ASPS's -97.2%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 21.6% revenue growth vs ASPS's 6.8% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (10.9x vs 45.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 11.2% margin vs ASPS's 3.6% | |
| Dividends | 3.1% yield; 15-year raise streak; the other pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +17.8% vs ASPS's -13.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 4.5% ROA vs FAF's 4.0%, ROIC 11.5% vs 10.7% |
ASPS vs FAF — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
ASPS vs FAF — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FAF leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FAF is the larger business by revenue, generating $6.0B annually — 34.3x ASPS's $175M. FAF is the more profitable business, keeping 11.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ASPS's 3.6%. On growth, ASPS holds the edge at +9.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $175M | $6.0B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $14M | $1.1B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $6M | $673M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $4M | $824M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +27.8% | +74.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +3.7% | +14.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +3.6% | +11.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +2.4% | +13.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +9.5% | -90.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +36.4% | +70.4% |
Valuation Metrics
FAF leads this category, winning 2 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 11.6x trailing earnings, FAF trades at a 74% valuation discount to ASPS's 45.3x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, FAF's 7.3x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than ASPS's 16.2x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $77M | $7.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $242M | $7.7B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 45.27x | 11.63x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 10.87x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 16.23x | 7.34x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.45x | 0.96x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 1.32x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 9.36x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ASPS leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), FAF scores 8/9 vs ASPS's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | +12.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +4.5% | +4.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +11.5% | +10.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +158.5% | +5.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.35x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $166M | $519M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $27M | $1.4B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $192M | $1.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -0.16x | 6.45x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
FAF leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in FAF five years ago would be worth $12,070 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,271 for ASPS. Over the past 12 months, FAF leads with a +17.8% total return vs ASPS's -13.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors FAF at 9.3% vs ASPS's -42.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -2.6% | +15.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -13.8% | +17.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -80.6% | +30.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -87.3% | +20.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -97.2% | +138.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -42.1% | +9.3% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ASPS and FAF each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ASPS is the less volatile stock with a -0.33 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than FAF's 0.59 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FAF currently trades 97.6% from its 52-week high vs ASPS's 42.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -0.33x | 0.59x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $15.96 | $71.47 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $4.30 | $53.09 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +42.5% | +97.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 55.4 | 62.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 29K | 945K |
Analyst Outlook
FAF leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
FAF is the only dividend payer here at 3.08% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $83.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 15 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +3.1% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $2.15 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.0% | +1.7% |
FAF leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). ASPS leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 1 tied.
ASPS vs FAF: Frequently Asked Questions
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ASPS or FAF a better buy right now?
For growth investors, First American Financial Corporation (FAF) is the stronger pick with 21.
6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 6. 8% for Altisource Portfolio Solutions S. A. (ASPS). First American Financial Corporation (FAF) offers the better valuation at 11. 6x trailing P/E (10. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate First American Financial Corporation (FAF) a "Buy" — based on 15 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 — ASPS or FAF?
On trailing P/E, First American Financial Corporation (FAF) is the cheapest at 11.
6x versus Altisource Portfolio Solutions S. A. at 45. 3x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ASPS or FAF?
Over the past 5 years, First American Financial Corporation (FAF) delivered a total return of +20.
7%, compared to -87. 3% for Altisource Portfolio Solutions S. A. (ASPS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: FAF returned +138. 4% versus ASPS's -97. 2%. 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 — ASPS or FAF?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Altisource Portfolio Solutions S.
A. (ASPS) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 33β versus First American Financial Corporation's 0. 59β — meaning FAF is approximately -278% more volatile than ASPS relative to the S&P 500.
05Which is growing faster — ASPS or FAF?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), First American Financial Corporation (FAF) is pulling ahead at 21.
6% versus 6. 8% for Altisource Portfolio Solutions S. A. (ASPS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: First American Financial Corporation grew EPS 376. 2% year-over-year, compared to 112. 0% for Altisource Portfolio Solutions S. A.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ASPS leads at 3. 7% annualised revenue growth. 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 — ASPS or FAF?
First American Financial Corporation (FAF) is the more profitable company, earning 8.
4% net margin versus 0. 9% for Altisource Portfolio Solutions S. A. — meaning it keeps 8. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: FAF leads at 11. 1% versus 4. 6% for ASPS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FAF leads at 95. 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.
07Which pays a better dividend — ASPS or FAF?
In this comparison, FAF (3.
1% yield) pays a dividend. ASPS does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
08Is ASPS or FAF better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Altisource Portfolio Solutions S.
A. (ASPS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 33)). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ASPS: -97. 2%, FAF: +138. 4%), 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.
09What are the main differences between ASPS and FAF?
These companies operate in different sectors (ASPS (Real Estate) and FAF (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: ASPS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; FAF is a small-cap high-growth stock. FAF pays a dividend while ASPS does not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.